Dion Gouws CPA San Diego Income Tax Accountant and Auditor

THE FOLLOWING ARE NEWS ARTICLES WHICH ARE REFERENCED THROUGHOUT THE WEBSITE. YOU WILL

IRS Announces Pension Plan Limitations for 2007

IR-2006-162, October 18, 2006

Washington — The Internal Revenue Service today announced cost of living adjustments applicable to dollar limitations for pension plans and other items for Tax Year 2007.

Section 415 of the Internal Revenue Code provides for dollar limitations on benefits and contributions under qualified retirement plans. It also requires that the Commissioner annually adjust these limits for cost of living increases.

Many of the pension plan limitations will change for 2007. For most of the limitations, the increase in the cost-of-living index met the statutory thresholds that trigger their adjustment. For example, the limitation under Section 402(g)(1) on the exclusion for elective deferrals described in Section 402(g)(3) is increased from $15,000 to $15,500. This limitation affects elective deferrals to Section 401(k) plans and to the Federal Government’s Thrift Savings Plan, among other plans.

Effective January 1, 2007, the limitation on the annual benefit under a defined benefit plan under Section 415(b)(1)(A) is increased from $175,000 to $180,000. For participants who separated from service before January 1, 2007, the limitation for defined benefit plans under Section 415(b)(1)(B) is computed by multiplying the participant's compensation limitation, as adjusted through 2006, by 1.0334.

The limitation for defined contribution plans under Section 415(c)(1)(A) is increased from $44,000 to $45,000.

The Code provides that various other dollar amounts are to be adjusted at the same time and in the same manner as the dollar limitation of Section 415(b)(1)(A). These dollar amounts and the adjusted amounts are as follows:

The limitation under Section 402(g)(1) on the exclusion for elective deferrals described in Section 402(g)(3) is increased from $15,000 to $15,500.

The annual compensation limit under Sections 401(a)(17), 404(l), 408(k)(3)(C), and 408(k)(6)(D)(ii) is increased from $220,000 to $225,000.

The dollar limitation under Section 416(i)(1)(A)(i) concerning the definition of key employee in a top-heavy plan is increased from $140,000 to $145,000.

The dollar amount under Section 409(o)(1)(C)(ii) for determining the maximum account balance in an employee stock ownership plan subject to a 5 year distribution period is increased from $885,000 to $915,000, while the dollar amount used to determine the lengthening of the 5 year distribution period is increased from $175,000 to $180,000.

The limitation used in the definition of highly compensated employee under Section 414(q)(1)(B) remains unchanged at $100,000.

The dollar limitation under Section 414(v)(2)(B)(i) for catch-up contributions to an applicable employer plan other than a plan described in Section 401(k)(11) or Section 408(p) for individuals aged 50 or over remains unchanged at $5,000. The dollar limitation under Section 414(v)(2)(B)(ii) for catch-up contributions to an applicable employer plan described in Section 401(k)(11) or Section 408(p) for individuals aged 50 or over remains unchanged at $2,500.

The annual compensation limitation under Section 401(a)(17) for eligible participants in certain governmental plans that, under the plan as in effect on July 1, 1993, allowed cost of living adjustments to the compensation limitation under the plan under Section 401(a)(17) to be taken into account, is increased from $325,000 to $335,000.

The compensation amount under Section 408(k)(2)(C) regarding simplified employee pensions (SEPs) is increased from $450 to $500.

The limitation on deferrals under Section 457(e)(15) concerning deferred compensation plans of state and local governments and tax-exempt organizations is increased from $15,000 to $15,500.

The compensation amounts under Section 1.61 21(f)(5)(i) of the Income Tax Regulations concerning the definition of “control employee” for fringe benefit valuation purposes is increased from $85,000 to $90,000. The compensation amount under Section 1.61 21(f)(5)(iii) is increased from $175,000 to $180,000.

The limitation under Section 408(p)(2)(E) regarding SIMPLE retirement accounts is increased from $10,000 to $10,500.

Administrators of defined benefit or defined contribution plans that have received favorable determination letters should not request new determination letters solely because of yearly amendments to adjust maximum limitations in the plans.

Active-Duty Reservists Get Relief on Retirement Plan Payments: Refunds of 10-Percent Tax Available Back to 2001, New Law Says

IR-2006-152, Sept. 28, 2006

WASHINGTON — Military reservists called to active duty can receive payments from their individual retirement accounts, 401(k) plans and 403(b) tax-sheltered annuities, without having to pay the early-distribution tax, according to the Internal Revenue Service.

The newly-enacted Pension Protection Act of 2006 eliminates the 10-percent early-distribution tax that normally applies to most retirement distributions received before age 59½. The new law provides this relief to reservists called to active duty for at least 180 days or for an indefinite period.

Eligible reservists activated after Sept. 11, 2001, and before Dec. 31, 2007, qualify for relief from this tax. This tax is often referred to as the 10-percent early-withdrawal penalty. Regular income taxes continue to apply to these payments in most cases.

Early distributions from both Roth and traditional IRAs received by a reservist while on active duty qualify for this relief. Likewise, a reservist’s elective contributions and earnings distributed to him or her by employer sponsored 401(k) plans and 403(b) tax-sheltered annuities also qualify for this relief.

Because this relief is retroactive, eligible reservists who already paid the 10-percent tax can claim a refund by using Form 1040X to amend their return for the year in which the retirement distribution was received. Eligible reservists should write the words, "active duty reservist," at the top of the form. In Part II Explanation of Changes, the reservist should write the date he or she was called to active duty, the amount of the retirement distribution and the amount of early-distribution tax paid.

Reservists can choose to re-contribute part or all of these distributions to an IRA. Ordinarily, these special contributions must be made within two years after the reservist's active-duty period ends. However, if the reservist's active duty ended before Aug. 17, 2006 (the date the new law was enacted), he or she will have until Aug. 17, 2008, to make these special contributions. No deduction is available for these contributions.

If you owe back taxes to the federal government, the next call asking you to pay may come not from an Internal Revenue Service officer, but from a private debt collector.

Within two weeks, the I.R.S. will turn over data on 12,500 taxpayers -- each of whom owes $25,000 or less in back taxes -- to three collection agencies. Larger debtors will continue to be pursued by I.R.S. officers. Back to tax

The move, an initiative of the Bush administration, represents the first step in a broader plan to outsource the collection of smaller tax debts to private companies over time. Although I.R.S. officials acknowledge that this will be much more expensive than doing it internally, they say that Congress has forced their hand by refusing to let them hire more revenue officers, who could pull in a lot of easy-to-collect money.

The private debt collection program is expected to bring in $1.4 billion over 10 years, with the collection agencies keeping about $330 million of that, or 22 to 24 cents on the dollar. Back to tax

By hiring more revenue officers, the I.R.S. could collect more than $9 billion each year and spend only $296 million -- or about three cents on the dollar -- to do so, Charles O. Rossotti, the computer systems entrepreneur who was commissioner from 1997 to 2002, told Congress four years ago.

I.R.S. officials on Friday characterized those figures as correct, but said that the plan Mr. Rossotti had proposed had been forestalled by Congress, which declined to authorize it to hire more revenue officers. Back to tax

Critics of the privatization plan point not only to the higher cost but also to what they say is a greater potential for abuse. With private companies in the mix, they say, debtors could more easily be tricked into paying money to scam artists using spoof Web sites or other schemes, a problem the I.R.S. alerted taxpayers to in April. Brady R. Bennett, collections director for the I.R.S., said that by 2008, about 350,000 past-due tax records will be distributed among about 10 private debt-collection agencies. To guard against fraud, he said, the agencies will contact taxpayers only by telephone or mail -- not the Internet -- and will instruct them to send all payments directly to the United States Treasury, not the private collection agency. Back to tax

One of the three companies selected by the I.R.S. is a law firm in Austin, Tex., where a former partner, Juan Pena, admitted in 2002 that he paid bribes to win a collection contract from the city of San Antonio. He went to jail for the crime.

Last month the same law firm, Linebarger Goggan Blair & Sampson firms, was again in the news. One of its competitors, Municipal Services Bureau, also of Austin, sued Brownsville, Tex., charging that the city improperly gave the Linebarger firm a collections contract that it suggested was influenced by campaign contributions to two city commissioners. Back to tax

Joe Householder, a spokesman for Linebarger firm, which specializes in delinquent tax collections, said it had resolved the issues raised by the Pena case in 2002 and that it believed it had acted properly in Brownsville. The mayor of Brownsville, Eddie Trevino Jr., said that the contract vote had been unanimous and scoffed at the accusations of misconduct.

The two other companies that have won debt collection contracts from the I.R.S. are Pioneer Credit Recovery of Arcade, N.Y., a division of the SLM Corporation, and the CBE Group of Waterloo, Iowa. Back to tax

The main objection so far to the privatization program is that it is more expensive than internal collection. ''I freely admit it,'' Mark W. Everson, the tax commissioner, told a House of Representatives committee in March.

Privatizing government services is often promoted as a way to cut costs. But the government would probably net $1.1 billion from private debt collectors over 10 years, compared with the $87 billion that could be reaped if the agency hired more revenue officers, as Mr. Rossotti had recommended. Back to tax

Taxpayer rights are at risk with privatization, Nina B. Olson, the I.R.S. taxpayer advocate, warned Congress earlier this year. ''Because private collectors will operate under rules of profit maximization rather than the I.R.S.'s customer-service based policy,'' she warned, the private collectors may have less incentive to safeguard taxpayer rights.

Al Cleland, a retired I.R.S. tax collector in Minnesota, predicted that using private collectors would cause some debtors to owe more. Back to tax

''We always told people to get current on their taxes first, so they would not have more penalties added, and then work on paying off their back taxes,'' Mr. Cleland said. ''A private collection agency has no incentive to tell taxpayers that, so people will pay more penalties.''

Mr. Bennett of the I.R.S. said that such advice was correct, but that it applied primarily to small business firm owners, whose cases will not be sent to the private agencies.

Under federal budget rules, money spent to hire tax collectors is treated as a discretionary expense, and Congress is cutting discretionary spending. In business terms, the rules treat the I.R.S. as a cost center, not as the government's profit center. Back to tax

The private debt-collection firms program, however, is outside the budget rules because, except for the start-up costs, the collectors are to be paid from the proceeds.

IRS to Cut Audits on Wealthiest

July 24, 2006 (United Press International) — The Bush administration plans to cut nearly in half the number of auditors who review tax returns of some of the wealthiest U.S. taxpayers and Firms.

Plans call for eliminating 157 of the Internal Revenue Service's 345 estate tax lawyers, The New York Times reported. The cuts will affect audits of taxpayers who are subject to gift and estate taxes when they transfer assets to their children and others, the newspaper said. Back to tax

IRS Deputy Commissioner Kevin Brown told the Times he ordered the staff cuts because the number of Americans who are subject to the estate tax has fallen under the Bush administration.Back to tax

However, six IRS estate tax lawyers whose jobs are at risk told the newspaper the cuts are part of a behind-the-scenes move at the IRS to shield people with political connections and complex tax-avoidance devices from thorough audits.Back to tax

WELCOME TO OUR WEB SITE!

Taxpayers Have Until April 17 to File and Pay

Additional Toyota and Lexus Vehicles Certified for the Energy Tax Credit

IRS Announces Pension Plan Limitations for 2007

Active-Duty Reservists Get Relief on Retirement Plan Payments: Refunds of 10-Percent Tax Available Back to 2001, New Law Says