419 and 412i Plan Help
On this blog you can find information on variable Annuities as well as captive insurance, 419 plans, section 79 plans, 412i plans, IRS problems and much more. If you find yourself in a position where you need an Expert Witness in any of these fields, do not hesitate to get in touch with Lance Wallach! Our side has never lost a case.
Showing posts with label 419 plan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 419 plan. Show all posts
Monday, April 9, 2018
Reportable Transactions .com: 419 Plan, 412i Plan
Reportable Transactions .com: 419 Plan, 412i Plan, Welfare benefit plan assistan...: 419 Plan, 412i Plan, Welfare benefit plan assistance, audits & Abusive tax shelters
Wednesday, March 4, 2015
Thursday, February 12, 2015
Don't Get Caught in Section 79 Trap One doctor almost lost everything.....
- Don’t Get Caught in Section 79 Trap
- One doctor almost lost everything ………..
- In 2006 Doctor X found himself in what he thought was
- the pleasant position of having a substantial amount of
- cash on hand that was not essential to the operation of
- his practice. That comfortable feeling did not last long.
- He quickly fell prey to a predatory insurance agent who
- sold him on the idea of Section 79 scam as a vehicle to
- obtain tax deductions. Of course what really interested
- the insurance agent was the funding vehicle, a large
- life insurance contract with American General as the
- insurance carrier, which just happened to net the
- agent a large commission.
- Unfortunately, the large, questionable tax deductions
- claimed by Doctor X indeed attracted the attention of
- the IRS. As a result of their audit, the IRS not only
- disallowed all of the tax deductions, but also imposed
- back taxes, an array of penalties, and interest, turning
- the doctor’s anticipated investment vehicle into
- something that could cost him everything he was
- saving and more. As if that weren’t bad enough, even
- that Draconian action was not the end of the story.
- None of his so-called financial advisors had told Doctor
- X about IRC Section 6707A. Under this section of the
- Code, huge fines can be imposed on those who fail to
- inform the Service about participation in listed or
- reportable transactions, or transactions substantially
- similar to listed transactions. Loosely defined, a
- reportable transaction is any transaction that has the
- potential for tax avoidance or evasion. Since he had no
- knowledge of this requirement, the doctor did not make
- the proper filings under Section 6707A, and is now
- also being threatened with monstrous fines for that
- failure to submit the proper forms in the proper format.
- Although these issues had the potential for great
- disaster and great financial loss for this doctor, all the
- anxiety and stress he has been suffering over this
- matter may soon have a happier ending than he
- expected at its onset because he had the sense to
- contact us for help, perhaps just in the nick of time. As
- a result of putting experts with a great deal of
- experience on his case, he now stands an excellent
- chance of having at least some of the penalties from
- the original audit abated. He will probably be able to
- recover the money that he sank into that large
- American General life insurance contract as well.
- Sometimes a properly worded letter to the insurance
- company is all it takes. Last, but certainly not least,
- Doctor X also has an excellent chance of avoiding the
- large Section 6707A penalties, as our experts in the art
- of filing late without paying fines are currently at work
- on that as well.
- The information provided herein is not intended as
- legal, accounting, financial or any type of advice for
- any specific individual or other entity. You should
- contact an appropriate professional for any such
- advice.
Serving Clients Nationwide
Lance Wallach Expert Witness
Monday, January 12, 2015
Section 79, captive insurance, 412i, 419, audits, problems and lawsuits
Section 79,
captive insurance, 412i, 419, audits, problems and lawsuits
April 24, 2012 By Lance Wallach, CLU, CHFC
Captive insurance, section 79, 419 and 412i problems
WebCPA
The dangers of being "listed"
A warning for 419, 412i, Sec.79 and captive insurance
Accounting Today: October 25,
By: Lance Wallach
Taxpayers who previously adopted 419, 412i, captive insurance or Section 79 plans are in
big trouble.
In recent years, the IRS has identified many of these arrangements as abusive devices to
funnel tax deductible dollars to shareholders and classified these arrangements as "listed
transactions."
These plans were sold by insurance agents, financial planners, accountants and attorneys
seeking large life insurance commissions. In general, taxpayers who engage in a "listed
transaction" must report such transaction to the IRS on Form 8886 every year that they
"participate" in the transaction, and you do not necessarily have to make a contribution or
claim a tax deduction to participate. Section 6707A of the Code imposes severe penalties
($200,000 for a business and $100,000 for an individual) for failure to file Form 8886 with
respect to a listed transaction.
But you are also in trouble if you file incorrectly.
I have received numerous phone calls from business owners who filed and still got fined. Not
only do you have to file Form 8886, but it has to be prepared correctly. I only know of two
people in the United States who have filed these forms properly for clients. They tell me that
was after hundreds of hours of research and over fifty phones calls to various IRS
personnel.
The filing instructions for Form 8886 presume a timely filing. Most people file late and follow
the directions for currently preparing the forms. Then the IRS fines the business owner. The
tax court does not have jurisdiction to abate or lower such penalties imposed by the IRS.
Many business owners adopted 412i, 419, captive insurance and Section 79 plans based
upon representations provided by insurance professionals that the plans were legitimate
plans and were not informed that they were engaging in a listed transaction.
Upon audit, these taxpayers were shocked when the IRS asserted penalties under Section
6707A of the Code in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Numerous complaints from
these taxpayers caused Congress to impose a moratorium on assessment of Section 6707A
penalties.
The moratorium on IRS fines expired on June 1, 2010. The IRS immediately started sending
out notices proposing the imposition of Section 6707A penalties along with requests for
lengthy extensions of the Statute of Limitations for the purpose of assessing tax. Many of
these taxpayers stopped taking deductions for contributions to these plans years ago, and
are confused and upset by the IRS's inquiry, especially when the taxpayer had previously
reached a monetary settlement with the IRS regarding its deductions. Logic and common
sense dictate that a penalty should not apply if the taxpayer no longer benefits from the
arrangement.
Treas. Reg. Sec. 1.6011-4(c)(3)(i) provides that a taxpayer has participated in a listed
transaction if the taxpayer's tax return reflects tax consequences or a tax strategy described
in the published guidance identifying the transaction as a listed transaction or a transaction
that is the same or substantially similar to a listed transaction. Clearly, the primary benefit in
the participation of these plans is the large tax deduction generated by such participation. It
follows that taxpayers who no longer enjoy the benefit of those large deductions are no
longer "participating ' in the listed transaction. But that is not the end of the story.
Many taxpayers who are no longer taking current tax deductions for these plans continue to
enjoy the benefit of previous tax deductions by continuing the deferral of income from
contributions and deductions taken in prior years. While the regulations do not expand on
what constitutes "reflecting the tax consequences of the strategy", it could be argued that
continued benefit from a tax deferral for a previous tax deduction is within the contemplation
of a "tax consequence" of the plan strategy. Also, many taxpayers who no longer make
contributions or claim tax deductions continue to pay administrative fees. Sometimes,
money is taken from the plan to pay premiums to keep life insurance policies in force. In
these ways, it could be argued that these taxpayers are still "contributing", and thus still
must file Form 8886.
It is clear that the extent to which a taxpayer benefits from the transaction depends on the
purpose of a particular transaction as described in the published guidance that caused such
transaction to be a listed transaction. Revenue Ruling 2004-20 which classifies 419(e)
transactions, appears to be concerned with the employer's contribution/deduction amount
rather than the continued deferral of the income in previous years. This language may
provide the taxpayer with a solid argument in the event of an audit.
The dangers of being "listed"
A warning for 419, 412i, Sec.79 and captive insurance
Accounting Today: October 25,
By: Lance Wallach
Taxpayers who previously adopted 419, 412i, captive insurance or Section 79 plans are in
big trouble.
In recent years, the IRS has identified many of these arrangements as abusive devices to
funnel tax deductible dollars to shareholders and classified these arrangements as "listed
transactions."
These plans were sold by insurance agents, financial planners, accountants and attorneys
seeking large life insurance commissions. In general, taxpayers who engage in a "listed
transaction" must report such transaction to the IRS on Form 8886 every year that they
"participate" in the transaction, and you do not necessarily have to make a contribution or
claim a tax deduction to participate. Section 6707A of the Code imposes severe penalties
($200,000 for a business and $100,000 for an individual) for failure to file Form 8886 with
respect to a listed transaction.
But you are also in trouble if you file incorrectly.
I have received numerous phone calls from business owners who filed and still got fined. Not
only do you have to file Form 8886, but it has to be prepared correctly. I only know of two
people in the United States who have filed these forms properly for clients. They tell me that
was after hundreds of hours of research and over fifty phones calls to various IRS
personnel.
The filing instructions for Form 8886 presume a timely filing. Most people file late and follow
the directions for currently preparing the forms. Then the IRS fines the business owner. The
tax court does not have jurisdiction to abate or lower such penalties imposed by the IRS.
Many business owners adopted 412i, 419, captive insurance and Section 79 plans based
upon representations provided by insurance professionals that the plans were legitimate
plans and were not informed that they were engaging in a listed transaction.
Upon audit, these taxpayers were shocked when the IRS asserted penalties under Section
6707A of the Code in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Numerous complaints from
these taxpayers caused Congress to impose a moratorium on assessment of Section 6707A
penalties.
The moratorium on IRS fines expired on June 1, 2010. The IRS immediately started sending
out notices proposing the imposition of Section 6707A penalties along with requests for
lengthy extensions of the Statute of Limitations for the purpose of assessing tax. Many of
these taxpayers stopped taking deductions for contributions to these plans years ago, and
are confused and upset by the IRS's inquiry, especially when the taxpayer had previously
reached a monetary settlement with the IRS regarding its deductions. Logic and common
sense dictate that a penalty should not apply if the taxpayer no longer benefits from the
arrangement.
Treas. Reg. Sec. 1.6011-4(c)(3)(i) provides that a taxpayer has participated in a listed
transaction if the taxpayer's tax return reflects tax consequences or a tax strategy described
in the published guidance identifying the transaction as a listed transaction or a transaction
that is the same or substantially similar to a listed transaction. Clearly, the primary benefit in
the participation of these plans is the large tax deduction generated by such participation. It
follows that taxpayers who no longer enjoy the benefit of those large deductions are no
longer "participating ' in the listed transaction. But that is not the end of the story.
Many taxpayers who are no longer taking current tax deductions for these plans continue to
enjoy the benefit of previous tax deductions by continuing the deferral of income from
contributions and deductions taken in prior years. While the regulations do not expand on
what constitutes "reflecting the tax consequences of the strategy", it could be argued that
continued benefit from a tax deferral for a previous tax deduction is within the contemplation
of a "tax consequence" of the plan strategy. Also, many taxpayers who no longer make
contributions or claim tax deductions continue to pay administrative fees. Sometimes,
money is taken from the plan to pay premiums to keep life insurance policies in force. In
these ways, it could be argued that these taxpayers are still "contributing", and thus still
must file Form 8886.
It is clear that the extent to which a taxpayer benefits from the transaction depends on the
purpose of a particular transaction as described in the published guidance that caused such
transaction to be a listed transaction. Revenue Ruling 2004-20 which classifies 419(e)
transactions, appears to be concerned with the employer's contribution/deduction amount
rather than the continued deferral of the income in previous years. This language may
provide the taxpayer with a solid argument in the event of an audit.
Monday, December 22, 2014
Tuesday, August 19, 2014
Can You Recover Money from 419 and 412i Plans? - HG.org
Can You Recover Money from 419 and 412i Plans? - HG.org
Welfare Benefit Plan Fraud: What Remedies Are Available? If you’ve been the victim of a 419 Welfare Benefit Plan scheme and now find yourself owing the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) taxes on something you were told was going to be tax deductible, it’s important to know what remedies might be available to you.
Remedies for abusive tax shelter schemes
Lance Wallach says that there are remedies for those who have been injured by an insurance company’s abusive tax shelter schemes. He predicts that we’ll see a huge spike in the number of people getting audited by the IRS.
Lance Wallach says that there are remedies for those who have been injured by an insurance company’s abusive tax shelter schemes. He predicts that we’ll see a huge spike in the number of people getting audited by the IRS.
Wednesday, May 28, 2014
Should you File, and then Opt Out?
There's been discussion of "opting out" of the program to take your chances in audit, but it's a topic fraught with danger. Now, however, there is guidance about opting out of the program that makes much of it transparent. Because of this late date it is recommended that you properly file FBARs and the 90-day request for amnesty extension. This is the first important step. If the forms are not done properly, you will have extensive problems and will not have to think about opting out. If your forms are properly done and filed, then your situation should be discussed with someone who is experienced in these matters.
Read the whole thing here
Read the whole thing here
Will Your Municipal Bond or Your Life Insurance Company Still Have Value Next Year?
Investor protection with municipal bonds is so spotty that there is potential for much mischief.
Disclosure, that bedrock of fair securities markets, is the heart of the problem facing municipal investors. Municipal issuers often don't file the most basic reports outlining their operating results or material changes in their financial conditions.
Even though hospitals, cities and states that borrow money are required by their bond covenants to make such filings, nondisclosure among the nearly 60,000 issuers is common.
To keep reading, click here
Disclosure, that bedrock of fair securities markets, is the heart of the problem facing municipal investors. Municipal issuers often don't file the most basic reports outlining their operating results or material changes in their financial conditions.
Even though hospitals, cities and states that borrow money are required by their bond covenants to make such filings, nondisclosure among the nearly 60,000 issuers is common.
To keep reading, click here
More Problems for 419 Plans
For years, life insurance companies and agents have tried to find ways of making life insurance premiums paid by business owners tax deductible. This would allow them to sell policies at a "discount."
The problem became acute a few years ago with outlandish claims about how §§419A(f)(5) and (6) of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) exempted employers from any tax deduction limitations. Other inaccurate assertions were made as well, until the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) finally put a stop to such egregious misrepresentations in 2002 by issuing regulations and naming such plans as "potentially abusive tax shelters" (or "listed transactions") that needed to be registered and disclosed to the IRS.This appeared to put an end to the scourge of scurrilous promoters, as many such plans disappeared from the landscape.
And what happened to the providers that were peddling §§419A(f)(5) and (6) life insurance plans a few years ago? We recently found the answer: Most of them found a new life as promoters of so-called "419(e)" welfare benefit plans.
READ THE REST HERE
Tuesday, May 20, 2014
Section 79 - HG.org
For businesses with 10 or fewer employees, the law prohibits full medical underwriting of the policies that are issued ("group" underwriting is required, which is much more risky for an insurance company).
Beginning this article, I wanted to reiterate my comments on implementing plans with fewer than 10 employees.
Amazingly, one of the insurance companies offering this plan seemly doesn't have the ability to issue non-medical underwriting policies. This is laughable and pathetic all at the same time, and a plan you'll want to stay far away from.
As I briefly alluded to in my previous article, one of the reasons I really do not like Section 79 plans is that they basically force employers and those helping them set up Section 79 plans to lie to the employees when implementing the plan.
Amazingly, one of the insurance companies offering this plan seemly doesn't have the ability to issue non-medical underwriting policies. This is laughable and pathetic all at the same time, and a plan you'll want to stay far away from.
As I briefly alluded to in my previous article, one of the reasons I really do not like Section 79 plans is that they basically force employers and those helping them set up Section 79 plans to lie to the employees when implementing the plan.
To continue reading, click here
If the IRS Contacts You... - HG.org
Keep your mouth shut-take this advice seriously.
If you give the agents any opening, you're dead.
They'll start with soft background questions, but before you know it, will have trapped you. And many questions won't be genuine-that is, the agents already know the answers and are asking only to see if you will lie or confess.
Questions typically asked by agents include:
Have you reported all of your income?
Where are your bank accounts and safe deposit boxes?
They'll start with soft background questions, but before you know it, will have trapped you. And many questions won't be genuine-that is, the agents already know the answers and are asking only to see if you will lie or confess.
Questions typically asked by agents include:
Have you reported all of your income?
Where are your bank accounts and safe deposit boxes?
If you want to find out the rest: click here
Tuesday, May 13, 2014
Rethinking Investing in Mutual Funds - HG.org
Rethinking Investing in Mutual Funds - HG.org
Taxes take a large bite out of taxable mutual funds. Recent tax-break laws will end in 2010 and it would be smart for taxable mutual fund investors to keep an eye on one of the main drags on their performance: taxes. One key reason why mutual funds paid out such hefty taxable distributions in recent years is because they can no longer carry forward the steep losses incurred during the 2000-2002 bear market, which had been used to offset gains in recent years.
The estimated taxes paid by taxable mutual fund (MF) investors increased 42 percent from those paid in 2006, and buy-and-hold taxable MF holders surrendered a record-setting $33.8 billion in taxes to the government, surpassing 2000's record amount of $31.3 billion!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)