IRS Lawyers

Overcoming Late IRC Section 1041 Transfer Presumption | IRS Lawyer & Attorney

/in , /by

In a previous article, I discussed that a late IRC Section 1041 transfer between former spouses is presumed to be unrelated to the cessation of the marriage. This means that such a transfer may not be considered tax-free for US tax purposes. In this article, I would like to explain what a late IRC Section 1041 transfer is and how to overcome the presumption that it is not related to the cessation of the marriage.

What is a Late IRC Section 1041 Transfer?

A transfer of property between ex-spouses is not taxable as long as it is “incident to divorce”. 26 U.S.C. §1041(a)(2). Temporary regulations state that such a transfer of property will be considered as incident to divorce as long as it occurs within one year of the date of the cessation of marriage or if this transfer is related to the cessation of marriage. Treas Reg §1.1041-1T(b), Q&A-6.

As I indicated in a previous article, a transfer of property is related to the cessation of marriage if it is done pursuant to a divorce or separation instrument and “occurs not more than 6 years after the date on which the marriage ceases”. Treas Reg §1.1041-1T(b), Q&A-7. If the transfer of property between ex-spouses occurs after six years of the cessation of marriage, then it is considered a late IRC Section 1041 transfer. Id.

Late IRC Section 1041 Transfer: Presumption that the Transfer if Not Related to Marriage

A late IRC Section 1041 transfer gives rise to a presumption that the transfer is not related to the cessation of marriage. Id. In other words, if an ex-spouse transfers a property to another ex-spouse more than six years after the cessation of their marriage, then the IRS will assume that the transfer is not related to the marriage.

Late IRC Section 1041 Transfer: Rebuttal of the Presumption

Luckily for US taxpayers, this presumption is not absolute and can be rebutted. “This presumption may be rebutted only by showing that the transfer was made to effect the division of property owned by the former spouses at the time of the cessation of the marriage.” Id.

The temporary Treasury regulations emphasize that the presumption can be rebutted by establishing two facts. First, the transfer was made late “because of factors which hampered an earlier transfer of the property, such as legal or business impediments to transfer or disputes concerning the value of the property owned at the time of the cessation of the marriage”. Id. Second, “the transfer is effected promptly after the impediment to transfer is removed.” Id.

Late IRC Section 1041 Transfer: PLRs Indicate Anticipation of Transfer in a Divorce Decree as the Crucial Factor

The IRS has issued a number of Private Letter Rulings (“PLRs”) on the issue of a late IRC Section 1041 transfer. Overall, the PLRs seem to follow an important trend in determining whether a taxpayer is successful in his rebuttal of the aforementioned presumption.

The key factor that appears in these PLRs seems to be whether a transfer of property (or an option to transfer a property) was part of the divorce decree. In other words, the most important question is whether this transfer of property was anticipated by the terms of the divorce decree. If it was and there is a good justification for the delay of the transfer of property, then the IRS is likely to rule that Section 1041 applies and the transfer would be deemed tax-free for federal income tax purposes.

Of course, it is highly important that a tax attorney review the situation to determine the likelihood that the IRS will agree on both points: anticipation of transfer in the divorce decree and the good reason for the delay of the transfer.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Professional Help Concerning Late IRC Section 1041 Transfers

If you are engaged in a divorce or you are an attorney representing a person who is engaged in a divorce, contact Sherayzen Law Office for experienced help with respect to taxation of transfers of property to an ex-spouse as well as other tax consequences of a divorce proceeding.

Ex-Spouse Property Transfers Incident to Divorce | Tax Lawyer & Attorney

/in , /by

This article introduces a series of articles on 26 U.S.C. §1041 and specifically the issue of tax treatment of ex-spouse property transfers incident to divorce. As a result of a divorce, it is very common for ex-spouses to transfer properties to each other as part of their settlement agreement. A question arises: are these ex-spouse property transfers taxable?

Note that this article covers a situation only when both spouses are US citizens and only direct transfers between ex-spouses (i.e. the transfers on behalf of an ex-spouse are not covered here).

General Rule for Ex-Spouse Property Transfers under 26 U.S.C. §1041

A property transfer between spouses is generally not subject to federal income tax. 26 U.S.C. §1041(a)(1). Transfers of property between former spouses are also not taxable as long as they are “incident to divorce”. 26 U.S.C. §1041(a)(2). For income tax purposes, the law treats the transferee spouse as having acquired the transferred property by gift. 26 U.S.C. §1041(b)(1). This means that “the basis of the transferee in the property shall be the adjusted basis of the transferor”. 26 U.S.C. §1041(b)(2).

It is important to emphasize that only transfers of property (real, personal, tangible and/or intangible) are governed by 26 U.S.C. §1041; transfers of services are not subject to the rules of this section. Treas Reg §1.1041-1T(a), Q&A-4.

Ex-Spouse Property Transfers Incident to Divorce

The key issue for the ex-spouse property transfers is whether they are “incident to divorce”. The statute and the temporary Treasury regulations describe two situations when a transfer between ex-spouses will be considered “incident to divorce”: “(1) The transfer occurs not more than one year after the date on which the marriage ceases, or (2) the transfer is related to the cessation of the marriage.” Treas Reg §1.1041-1T(b), Q&A-6; 26 U.S.C. §1041(c).

Ex-Spouse Property Transfers Not More Than One Year After the Cessation of a Marriage

Any transfers of property between former spouses that occur not more than one year after the date on which the marriage ceases are subject to the nonrecognition rules of 26 U.S.C. §1041(a). This is case even if a transfer of property is not really related to the cessation of the marriage. Treas Reg § 1.1041-1T(b), Q&A-6.

Ex-Spouse Property Transfers Related to the Cessation of the Marriage

26 U.S.C. §1041 does not actually define the meaning of “transfers related to the cessation of the marriage”. Rather, the temporary Treasury regulations explain this term.

The temporary regulations establish a two-prong test that states that a transfer of property is treated as related to the cessation of the marriage if: (1) “the transfer is pursuant to a divorce or separation instrument, as defined in section 71(b)(2)”, and (2) “the transfer occurs not more than 6 years after the date on which the marriage ceases”. Treas Reg §1.1041-1T(b), Q&A-7. The definition of divorce or separation instrument in the first prong also includes a modification or amendment to such decree or instrument.

If either or both of the prongs of this test are not satisfied (for example, the transfer occurred more than six years after the cessation of the marriage), then a transfer “is presumed to be not related to the cessation of the marriage.” Id. This is a rebuttable presumption and, in a future article, I will discuss how a taxpayer may rebut this presumption.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Professional Help Concerning Tax Consequences of a Property Transfer to an Ex-Spouse

If you are engaged in a divorce or you are an attorney representing a person who is engaged in a divorce, contact Sherayzen Law Office for experienced help with respect to taxation of transfers of property to an ex-spouse as well as other tax consequences of a divorce proceeding.

Shakira Tax Evasion is Reportedly Investigated by Spain | Tax Law News

/0 Comments/in , /by

On January 23, 2018, the Spanish Newspaper based in Madrid “El País” broke the news that the Colombian Singer Shakira (full name Shakira Isabel Mebarak) is being reportedly investigated by the Spanish tax authorities for tax evasion. Let’s explore the alleged Shakira tax evasion investigation in more detail.

Alleged Shakira Tax Evasion Investigation is Centered Around Spanish Tax Residency

At the core of the alleged investigation of potential Shakira tax evasion lies the concept of tax residency. Under the tax laws of Spain, a person who resides in Spain for at least 183 days during a calendar tax year may generally be considered a Spanish tax resident. As such, he would be required to disclose his worldwide income on a Spanish tax return.

It should be noted (as Sherayzen Law Office has pointed out in the past) that Spain is a very strict tax jurisdiction in many aspects, especially when it comes to tax evasion. In fact, it is the only country in the European Union which has a form similar to the IRS Form 8938 – Spanish Modelo 720.

Alleged Shakira Tax Evasion Investigation: 2011-2014 Tax Residency of Shakira in Question

El País reported that the Spanish tax authorities focused their investigation of Shakira on tax years 2011 through 2014. The singer has claimed that she was resident of the Bahamas at that time. Shakira’s lawyer stated that Shakira lived in several places over the years due to her lifestyle as an international singer and has been in full compliance with tax laws of all relevant jurisdictions.

The tax authorities reportedly reached a different conclusion – that Shakira was a Spanish tax resident during the years 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014. It is not clear whether the alleged conclusion was arrived at using direct evidence or indirect evidence. El País, for example, stated that the Spanish Tax Agency investigators went to her hairdresser in Spain to establish that Shakira lived in Spain.

It should be pointed out that Shakira officially declared herself as a Spanish tax resident in 2015 due to her marriage with the Spanish soccer player Gerard Pique.

Paradise Papers Could Have Prompted the Investigation of Potential Shakira Tax Evasion

The alleged Shakira Tax Evasion investigation also has an interesting twist. It appears that it could have been prompted by the famous Paradise Papers in November of 2017.

The Paradise Papers is a collection of 13.4 million of files that were stolen from the client files of Appleby Law Firm, a Singapore-based trust company, as well as company registries of nineteen different jurisdictions.

According to the Paradise Papers, Shakira transferred some or all of her intellectual property and trademarks to Tournesol, Ltd., (“Tournesol”) a company registered in Malta in 2009. Shakira is the sole shareholder of this company. Tournesol increased its capital by 31 million euros through an interest-free loan agreement with ACER Entertainment, a related company owned by Shakira and registered in Luxembourg.

Alleged Shakira Tax Evasion Investigation: Potential Penalties

Shakira’s estimated net worth is $200 million. This means that her tax fraud case will involve large numbers, possibly in the millions of dollars.

It appears that if Shakira is found guilty of tax fraud that is in excess of 600,000 euros, she could be facing from two to six years in prison for each count of tax fraud. Moreover, she could be facing a fine of six times the amount of underpaid tax. It should be pointed out that the charges will most likely focus on the years 2012-2014, because 2011 appears to be barred by the Spanish statute of limitations.

Shakira’s celebrity status will not have any impact on the Spanish tax authorities. In fact, she now joined a list of many celebrities who have been investigated by the Spanish Tax Agency, including Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo.

2018 Government Shutdown is the IRS Nightmare | IRS Lawyer & Attorney

/0 Comments/in , /by

A government shutdown is always bad for the normal functioning of federal agencies, but the 2018 government shutdown spells disaster for the IRS, especially if it lasts for a significant amount of time.

2018 Government Shutdown Comes at the Worst Time for the IRS

What makes the current 2018 government shutdown so bad is the timing. The shutdown comes just nine days before the tax season begins. For the IRS, the tax season is always the busiest time of the year.

Moreover, this year, the shutdown also comes right after a huge tax reform passed. Many of the provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 still need to be implemented, the IRS software needs to be adjusted and the employees at the Call Centers need to be prepared to answer the questions of millions of Americans about the new tax laws.

2018 Government Shutdown Comes After Years of Budget Cuts

The 2018 government shutdown also comes after many years of the IRS budget cuts. Since 2010, the IRS lost more than $900 million in funding, eliminated 18,000 full-time positions and had to implement hiring freezes. Moreover, many IRS veterans are now retiring without being able to train proper replacement. This means that the IRS is gradually losing its best, highly-knowledgeable and experienced cadres – professionals who know how to enforce tax laws in an equitable manner. This unfortunate circumstance will inevitably have a profound impact on IRS ability to properly implement US tax laws in the future.

It is not only the professionals that the IRS is losing. The long years of budget cuts dramatically reduced the IRS ability to staff its call centers. Even before the shutdown, the IRS projected that, with its current budget, it will only be able to answer at best four calls out of every ten – i.e. the IRS said that it could answer only 40% of the calls, leaving 60% of Americans without any assistance.

Furthermore, the budget cuts came at a time when there was an unprecedented explosion of new tax laws, domestic and international, which have created an enormous demand for more IRS employees. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 is just the latest example of these new laws.

So far, the IRS has been able to more or less survive by cutting everything it could in the non-essential areas and relying on new technology to save costs. However, it does not appear that this is a sustainable situation in the future.

2018 Government Shutdown: Immediate Impact

The most immediate impact of the 2018 government shutdown will be the fact that only 43.5% of IRS employees will be coming to work on next week. 56.5% of the IRS workforce will be forced to stay at home.

While the IRS will continue to do “excepted activities” such as processing 2017 tax returns (this is a matter of life and death for the federal government), a number of its functions will be suspended.

Here is the list of the most common examples of the suspended activities: issuing refunds, processing of amended tax returns (Forms 1040X), conducting any audits or examinations, processing of non-electronic tax returns that do not include remittances, non-automated collections, legal counsel, planning, research, training, all development activities, most information systems functions, headquarters and administrative functions not related to the safety of life and protection of property, service center processing after the point of batching (i.e. Code & Edit, data transcription, error resolution, un-postables) and other activities. With respect to offshore voluntary disclosures, they are not likely to be processed while the government shutdown continues.

At this point, we can only wish that the government shutdown be over as soon as possible to minimize the negative impact it may have on the IRS, our nation and our fellow citizens.

Sherayzen Law Office will continue to monitor the situation.

Treasury List of Boycott Countries Published | Tax Lawyer & Attorney

/0 Comments/in , /by

On January 8, 2018, the US Treasury Department published a list of boycott countries. Let’s analyze what is meant here by Boycott Countries.

Boycott Countries: The Meaning of Boycott Under IRC Section 999(b)(3)

IRC Section 999(a)(3) requires the Department of the Treasury to publish (at least on a quarterly basis) a current list of countries which require or may require participation in or cooperation with an international boycott. IRC Section 999(b)(3) defines “boycott participation and cooperation”.

Basically, the cooperation with an international boycott requires a person to agree:

“(i) to refrain from doing business with or in a country which is the object of the boycott or with the government, companies, or nationals of that country;
(ii) to refrain from doing business with any United States person engaged in trade in a country which is the object of the boycott or with the government, companies, or nationals of that country;
(iii) to refrain from doing business with any company whose ownership or management is made up, all or in part, of individuals of a particular nationality, race, or religion, or to remove (or refrain from selecting) corporate directors who are individuals of a particular nationality, race, or religion; or
(iv) to refrain from employing individuals of a particular nationality, race, or religion; or
(B) as a condition of the sale of a product to the government, a company, or a national of a country, to refrain from shipping or insuring that product on a carrier owned, leased, or operated by a person who does not participate in or cooperate with an international boycott (within the meaning of subparagraph (A)).” IRC Section 999(b)(3)

List of Boycott Countries

The following countries were placed on the boycott list by the Department of the Treasury as of January 2, 2018: Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, United Arab Emirates, Yemen