New York Enacts New Legislation For New York Nonprofits

Read Publication

New York’s Governor Andrew Cuomo has signed the Nonprofit Revitalization Act of 2013 into law, effective July 1, 2014, making a number of key reforms to New York law that have long been sought by the charitable sector and legal practitioners. Nonprofit organizations will now be able to incorporate, dissolve and merge more easily; communicate and hold meetings using modern technology like Skype and videoconference; and effect various transactions without the need to seek Court approval. The new law has added new governance provisions to provide crucial oversight and governance reforms. Nonprofit boards will have to perform stricter oversight of insider deals, and the Attorney General will be better able to hold insiders accountable for abuse. The new law requires the adoption of more robust financial oversight requirements, conflict of interest policies, and, for certain charities, whistleblower policies to protect nonprofit employees from retaliation when they identify wrongdoing.

Corporate Matters: Oral Agreement Can Be Unilaterally Terminated If There Is No Definite Term or a Particular Undertaking

Read Publication

Under New York partnership law (“Partnership Law”), a partnership can be formed orally. Additionally, a partnership may be dissolved unilaterally if “no definite term or particular undertaking is specified” in the underlying agreement.

In Gelman v. Buehler 2013 NY Slip OP 01991 (March 26, 2013, plaintiff (P) and defendant (D) were recent business school graduates who decided to form a partnership in 2007. D had proposed a plan to P aimed at acquiring $600,000 from investors for the purpose of establishing a "search fund" to research and identify and raise any additional funding needed to pay the purchase price of the targeted business. P and D were to manage the business with the goal of increasing its value until it could be sold at a profit (referred to as a "liquidity event") and the investors would share in the profits realized from the sale. P accepted D's proposal and the partnership was formed by oral agreement. P and D expected that the business plan would reach its objective in four to seven years. The partners apparently pursued prospective investors for several months. D withdrew from the venture after P refused his demand for majority ownership of the partnership.

Tax 101: Undisclosed Offshore Accounts, Are You Eligible for Streamlined Procedures?

Volume 1 No 1    |    Read Article

By Stanley C. Ruchelman and Armin Gray

For persons having undisclosed offshore accounts and contemplating participation in the I.R.S. voluntary disclosure program, one frequently asked question is eligibility for the streamlined procedures (“Streamlined Procedures”) announced by the I.R.S. O.V.D.I. The Streamlined Procedures are effective as of September 1, 2012 and should be considered if there are offshore tax-noncompliance issues. If an individual qualifies, the benefits are substantial: he or she will be eligible for fast-track resolution of the case, the look-back period is limited to three years of delinquent tax returns and six years of F.B.A.R.'s, and he or she will avoid penalties. However, most taxpayers will not qualify as eligibility is limited to a narrow class of taxpayers where intentional tax non-compliance is unlikely to exist.   See more →

Dividend Equivalents: Past, Present and Future

Read Publication

Code §871(m) of the Code was enacted as part of the H.I.R.E. Act on March 18, 2010 and treats “dividend equivalents” as U.S. source dividends for withholding tax purposes. On January 23, 2012, Temporary Regulations (the “2012 Temporary Regulations”) and a notice of proposed rulemaking (the “2012 Proposed Regulations”) were published. The 2012 Proposed Regulations and Temporary Regulations provided guidance relating to U.S. source dividend equivalent payments made to nonresident individuals and foreign corporations. They also provided guidance to withholding agents. Correcting amendments to the 2012 Temporary Regulations were published on February 6, 2012, on March 8, 2012 and on August 31, 2012. On December 5, 2013 new proposed regulations (the “2013 Proposed Regulations”) withdrew the 2012 Proposed Regulations. In addition and at the same date, final regulations (“2013 Final Regulations”) were published that essentially adopted the 2012 Temporary Regulations.

BACKGROUND

Code §871(m) defines a dividend equivalent as one of the following:

• Any substitute dividend made pursuant to a securities lending or a salerepurchase transaction that (directly or indirectly) is contingent upon, or determined by reference to, the payment of a dividend from sources within the United States;
• Any payment made pursuant to a specified notional principal contract (“N.P.C.”) that (directly or indirectly) is contingent upon, or determined by reference to, the payment of a dividend from sources within the United States; and
• Any other payment determined by the Secretary to be substantially similar to a payment described in the two previous categories (a substantially similar dividend).

I.R.S. Issues Regulations Regarding P.F.I.C. Reporting Requirements

Read Publication

On December 30, 2013, the I.R.S. released temporary and final regulations regarding P.F.I.C. reporting requirements. In T.D. 9650, the I.R.S. reaffirmed that it would not require any U.S. persons that owned any interest in a P.F.I.C. during 2010, 2011 or 2012 to file an information return on Form 8621 under the new rules unless they sold the stock, received a distribution or needed to make a P.F.I.C. election. However, Form 8621 will be required to be filed by any U.S. person that owned at any time during 2013 an interest in a P.F.I.C. Thus the form will filed with the 2013 income tax return that must be filed later this year.

The regulations adopted rules addressing constructive or indirect ownership. The constructive ownership or attribution rules can cause a person to become an owner of an interest in a P.F.I.C. even though no stock is directly owned in the P.F.I.C. As a result, ownership of P.F.I.C stock by a corporation, partnership, trust or estate can be attributed to the entity’s shareholders, partners or beneficiaries, who then can become subject to the P.F.I.C. rules.

BACKGROUND

U.S. investors must determine if any foreign corporation owned may be classified as a P.F.I.C. A foreign corporation will be classified as a P.F.I.C. if either (i) 75% or more of the corporation's gross income is passive income (such as from interest, dividends or capital gains) or (ii) 50% or more of the corporation's assets are held for the production of passive income (such as stocks, bonds or cash). A typical P.F.I.C. is an offshore investment company or mutual fund although P.F.I.C. status can be a potential issue for any foreign corporation, especially if the corporation has large cash reserves or is in the services business outside the U.S.

Non-Resident Alien Interest Reporting Rules Upheld

Read Publication

On January 13, 2014, the District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed the Florida Bankers Association and the Texas Bankers Association (collectively, the “Plaintiffs”) lawsuit that challenged the 2012 regulations requiring U.S. banks (including U.S. offices of non-U.S. financial institutions) to report to the I.R.S. the amount of interest paid to certain non-residents.

Pursuant to the United States’ relentless fight against offshore tax evasion, the I.R.S. finalized regulations requiring U.S. banks to report certain information on non-U.S. account holders. These regulations are necessary, in part, for countries that request reciprocal information on their resident account holders who have U.S. financial accounts as a precondition to signing an I.G.A. with the U.S. In particular, the regulations require reporting of deposit interest aggregating $10 or more paid to N.R.A.s on Form 1042-S (Foreign Person’s U.S. Source Income Subject to Withholding) for the calendar year in which interest is paid. Interest is reportable even if there is no withholding requirement. The regulations apply to all payments of interest made after January 1, 2013, and the first Form 1042-S must be filed with the I.R.S. by March 15, 2014. The reporting will be made with respect to an N.R.A. who is a resident of a country that is identified as a country with which the U.S. has in effect an income tax agreement relating to the exchange of tax information.

Year-End Review: I.R.S. O.V.D.P.

Read Publication

The I.R.S. and the Department of Justice (“D.O.J.”) continued their tenacious efforts against offshore tax evasion. Three major events took place in 2013: (i) a shift in the methodology to detect quiet disclosures; (ii) the bank voluntary disclosure program (“B.V.D.P.”) announced by the United States and Switzerland on August 29, 2013, and (iii) certain notable convictions, plea deals, and civil penalties.

We expect the I.R.S. and D.O.J.’s unwavering focus on offshore tax evasion to continue in 2014 as F.A.T.C.A begins to be implemented. Some practitioners fear that when F.A.T.C.A. information reporting begins, the O.V.D.P. may end, as the I.R.S. will have received information automatically on foreign accounts. If a U.S. taxpayer remains uncertain about declaring foreign financial accounts, now is the time to take remedial action. There is no Plan B, if time runs out.

QUIET DISCLOSURES

While the I.R.S. officially has discouraged quiet disclosures, a Government Accountability Office (“G.A.O”) report, released on April 26, 2013, identified shortcomings in the I.R.S.’s ability to detect quiet disclosures. According to the G.A.O. report:

[The] G.A.O. analyzed amended returns filed for tax year 2003 through tax year 2008, matched them to other information available to IRS about taxpayers' possible offshore activities, and found many more potential quiet disclosures than IRS detected. Moreover, IRS has not researched whether sharp increases in taxpayers reporting offshore accounts for the first time is due to efforts to circumvent monies owed, thereby missing opportunities to help ensure compliance . . . Taxpayer attempts to circumvent taxes, interest, and penalties by not participating in an offshore program, but instead simply amending past returns or reporting on current returns previously unreported offshore accounts, result in lost revenues and undermine the programs' effectiveness.

Year-End Review: F.A.T.C.A.

Read Publication

Implementation of F.A.T.C.A., first enacted in 2010, took great strides in 2013.

On January 17, 2013, the I.R.S. issued the final F.A.T.C.A. regulations. In more than 500 pages, the I.R.S. laid out a roadmap for determining who is covered by F.A.T.C.A., who is exempt, and the burdens imposed on foreign financial institutions (“F.F.I.'s"), other foreign investors, and U.S. withholding agents to comply with its rules.

On July 12, 2013, the I.R.S. released Notice 2013-43, which revised the timelines included in the final F.A.T.C.A. regulations for withholding agents and F.F.I.'s to begin their due diligence, withholding, and information reporting requirements. Specifically, it delayed implementation of F.A.T.C.A. withholding on investment income (but not gross proceeds from sale) by six months so that withholding will first start on July 1, 2014. It also adopted a six-month extension for the F.A.T.C.A. registration portal (the “Portal”). Also deferred were rules applicable to grandfathered obligations, new account opening procedures, new qualified intermediaries (“Q.I.'s"), withholding foreign partnerships (“W.P.'s"), and withholding foreign trusts (“W.T.'s") agreements. Withholding on gross proceeds from sales of stocks and securities is still scheduled to come into effect on January 1, 2017.

Year-End Review: Net Investment Income Tax

Read Publication

The Net Investment Income Tax (“N.I.I.T.”) was added to the Code on March 30, 2010. It is imposed at a rate of 3.8% of certain net investment income (“Net Investment Income”) of individuals, estates and trusts having income above specified triggering amounts. For individuals who are calendar year taxpayers, the tax first became effective in 2013. Thus, the current tax return filing season will be the first time taxpayers feel the effect of the tax. In late 2013, the I.R.S. released final and proposed regulations for the N.I.I.T. These regulations clarify proposals that were issued on December 5, 2012. This article provides a summary of the N.I.I.T. and explains how the new regulations will affect taxpayers.

IN GENERAL

Applicable Thresholds

Individuals will owe the tax if they have Net Investment Income and also have modified adjusted gross income over the following thresholds:

Filing Status	Threshold Amount
Married Taxpayers (Joint Filing)	$250,000
Married Taxpayers (Separate Filing)	$125,000
Single	$200,000
Head of household (with qualifying person)	$200,000
Qualifying widow(er) with dependent child	$250,000

These amounts are not indexed for inflation.