Posts Tagged trade

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act: How It Still Affects You

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act: How It Still Affects You

Editor’s Note: This article is a follow-up to The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act – How Will It Affect YOU? published in the Winter 2018 issue.

On Aug. 8, the IRS issued proposed regulations for the newly created Section 199A 20 Percent Qualified Business Income (QBI) deduction. 199A has been one of the most talked about aspects of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act since its passage last December. This provision of the act was included in the tax reform bill in an attempt to give pass-through entities (such as partnerships, LLCs and S corporations) and sole proprietorships similar tax savings that were provided to C Corporations (C Corp tax rates were reduced from a high of 35 percent to a flat 21 percent). The new 20 percent QBI deduction is effective for the 2018 tax year through 2025.

Although the new tax deduction is generous, the structure of the deduction is complicated with many limits, phase-ins, and phase-outs. Whether or not you will be able to take the deduction depends upon many factors, the key being your personal taxable income. Other factors include wages paid by the practice, the value of business property, nature of income, etc.

Physicians are especially impacted by limits on the deduction since the income is earned from what the law labels as a “Specified Service Trade or Business” (SSTB).

What is a Specified Service Trade or Business (SSTB)?

Most unincorporated business owners, partners and S Corporation shareholders benefit from the 199A deduction. However, Congress precludes some higher-income business owners from taking the deduction if the income is earned from an SSTB.

An SSTB is a trade or business involving the performance of services in the fields of health, law, accounting, actuarial science, performing arts, consulting, athletics, financial services, investing and investment management, trading, dealing in certain assets or any trade or business where the principal asset is the reputation or skill of one or more of its employees. Per IRS regulations:

The term “performance of services in the field of health” means the provision of medical services by physicians, pharmacists, nurses, dentists, veterinarians, physical therapists, psychologists and other similar health care professionals who provide medical services directly to a patient. The performance of services in the field of health does not include the provision of services not directly related to a medical field, even though the services may purportedly relate to the health of the service recipient. For example, the performance of services in the field of health does not include the operation of health clubs or health spas that provide physical exercise or conditioning to their customers, payment processing, or research, testing and manufacture and/or sales of pharmaceuticals or medical devices.

Based on this definition, physician practices are considered SSTBs, and therefore, limits apply on the available deduction.

How does the deduction work?

The QBI deduction is based off “pass-through income,” income reported on a Schedule K-1 earned from partnerships, LLCs and S Corporations or if a sole proprietor, what is reported on Schedule C of Form 1040 individual income tax return. Wages reported on a W2 or guaranteed payments paid to partners do not qualify as QBI. It excludes any investment-related items, such as interest, dividends or capital gains or losses from the sale of property. The maximum deduction available is 20 percent of QBI.

Although the deduction is calculated based on income earned from a trade or business (i.e. – the physician practice), the actual amount of the deduction is dependent on the taxable income of the individual. Most physicians with taxable income over $415,000 filing a joint return will be hard-pressed to qualify for the deduction. As such, it is possible for a large group practice to have some physicians qualify for a QBI deduction and some not qualify when there is a large variation in income among the owners.

The deduction itself is claimed on Form 1040 individual income tax return. Form 1040 will include a new line for the deduction in arriving at taxable income.

How do I know if I qualify to take the deduction?

The deduction is fairly simple and straightforward for individuals with married filing joint taxable income of $315,000 or less ($157,500 or less if filing single). Those taxpayers receive the full 20 percent QBI deduction. Above those taxable income amounts, the 20 percent QBI deduction becomes subject to a tangled web of limitations, phase-ins, and phase-outs. Individuals with income from SSTBs (i.e. physician practices) are subject to even more limitations that, depending on the individual’s taxable income, quickly eliminate the 20 percent deduction altogether.

Let’s first examine the limits applicable to both service and non-service businesses alike once taxable income exceeds the limits noted above. The 20 percent qualified business income deduction is limited by the greater of:

  • 50 percent of W2 wages paid by the qualifying business or
  • 25 percent of W2 wages paid plus 2.5 percent of unadjusted basis of all qualified property.

These limits are phased in for joint filers with taxable income greater than $315,000 but less than $415,000 ($157,500 / $207,500 for non-joint filers) and result in a reduced 1991A QBI deduction.

In addition to the above limits, the ability to take the 199A QBI deduction for individuals with pass-through income from a SSTB is completely lost once individual taxable income exceeds $207,500 if filing single or $415,000 if filing joint. Phase out begins at $157,500 filing single and $315,000 filing joint.

The chart at the bottom of this section summarizes the various limitations, phase-ins and phase-outs for both SSTBs and non-SSTBs.

To illustrate, assume Dr. A is a sole practitioner who files a joint return. Her practice is organized as a single-member LLC. The qualified business income as reported on Schedule C of Dr. A’s 1040 is $240,000 after wages paid to staff of $195,000. Dr. A and her husband’s taxable income for the year is $295,000.

In this example, Dr. A’s tentative 20 percent deduction is $48,000 ($240,000 QBI* 20 percent). Since Dr. A’s overall taxable income is less than $315,000, she is able to take the full deduction of $48,000 since neither the W2 phase-in limit nor the SSTB phase-out limit applies.

But what if Dr. A’s taxable income is over the $415,000 limit noted above? Since the medical practice is considered a SSTB and income is over the allowed threshold, Dr. A is not allowed to take any amount as a QBI deduction.

It is important to note 199A generally requires taxpayers to identify QBI on a business-by-business basis. Physicians who own interests in other non-SSTB pass-through entities may still qualify for a 199A deduction for that trade or business.

IRS Anti-Abuse Regulations

Various planning strategies have been considered by physicians and their advisors on how to avoid the SSTB limitation. Some of these strategies became known as “crack and pack,” which involved splitting a practice into separate legal entities to isolate non-medical activities to qualify for some amount of deduction. One of the entities would provide the medical services and the other entity would lease office space, provide billing services, or various other administrative functions.

However, the regulations issued by the IRS contain various anti-abuse provisions – one of which significantly limits the ability to segregate activities among various entities when there is common ownership among the entities solely to qualify for the 199A QBI deduction. The proposed regulations state if any trade or business provides 80 percent or more of its property or services to an SSTB, and if that other trade or business and the SSTB share 50 percent or more common ownership, then that other business is considered an SSTB too. For purposes of this anti-abuse rule, ownership is both direct and indirect ownership by related parties.

It is a common practice for various components of a physician practice to be held in separate entities, often for legal protection and tax planning. One such example is real-estate held in a separate entity and rented to the practice. This is still acceptable; the anti-abuse regulations just prohibit taking a 199A QBI deduction in such circumstances.

The regs contain various other anti-abuse provisions, such as treating non-SSTB’s as an SSTB if they share expenses/overhead with a 50 percent commonly owned SSTB. In addition, there will be increased scrutiny over changes in classification between employee versus independent contractor or partner/shareholder status due to the impact on qualifying for the 199A QBI deductions. Physicians should consult with their attorney/tax advisor prior to making any such changes in an attempt to take a 199A QBI deduction.

Planning Opportunities

Although not every physician will be able to take advantage of the new 20 percent QBI deduction, the Tax Reform and Jobs Act still provides numerous other tax breaks, such as an overall reduction in individual income tax rates, elimination of some itemized deduction limitations, increased depreciation deductions, etc. For those physicians under the SSTB thresholds noted above, now is the time to time to consult with your tax advisor to ensure optimization of the 199A QBI deduction.

  • Physicians under the SSTB threshold should review and evaluate the following items and discuss with their tax advisor and attorney:
  • Whether he or she is operating the practice in the most appropriate entity form to qualify/maximize the 20 percent QBI deduction.
  • Partners in a partnership currently receiving guaranteed payments should consider revising their partnership agreements and taking draws instead to increase QBI and the corresponding 20 percent deduction.
  • For S Corporations, review compensation agreements and ensure a reasonable compensation is paid for services provided (not QBI), and pay the remainder of income as a distribution (does qualify for QBI).

In Summary

This summary merely scratches the surface of the 199A 20 percent QBI deduction and was written in the context of physician practices. Although the regulations are still in proposed form and not expected to be finalized until later this year, the Department of the Treasury has provided sufficient insight and interpretation of the law to plan for its implementation.

Executive Summary

  • The new 20 percent QBI deduction is based on pass-through income earned from partnerships, S-Corps, LLC’s or sole proprietorships.
  • W2 wages/guaranteed payments do not qualify as QBI.
  • Deduction will be claimed on Form 1040 individual tax return.
  • Claiming the deduction will be difficult, if not impossible to claim for physicians with taxable income over $207,500 if filing single or $415,000 if married filing joint unless there are sources of income from other non-SSTB pass-through entities.
  • Newly issued IRS anti-abuse regulations limit the ability to split apart practice into various entities to isolate non-medical activities in order to take the deduction.
  • Physicians earning under the above thresholds should meet with their tax advisor and attorney now to maximize potential deductions for 2018.

Mark Baker is a Principal with Jackson Thornton CPA’s and Consultants in Montgomery, Ala. He may be reached by calling (334) 834-7660 or email Mark.Baker@JacksonThornton.com. Jackson Thornton is an official partner with the Medical Association.

Posted in: Management

Leave a Comment (0) →

Alabama Legislature Considers State Law on Cybersecurity

Alabama Legislature Considers State Law on Cybersecurity

At the time of the writing of this article, Alabama is one step closer to having a law on the books related to cybersecurity. As one of only two states without a state data breach law, Alabama is considering legislation that requires certain entities, “covered entities,” to report to state agencies and affected individuals when there has been an unauthorized acquisition of “electronic, sensitive personally identifying information.”

On March 1, 2018, the Alabama Senate passed SB318, and if passed by the House and signed by the Governor, it would require “covered entities” to notify Alabama’s Attorney General, Alabama residents whose information has been compromised, and consumer credit-reporting agencies of a data breach. For health care providers covered by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (“HIPAA”), federal law already requires notification when they experience unauthorized disclosures of protected health information. In addition to HIPAA’s breach notification requirements, the new Alabama law would require reporting at the state level for healthcare providers who experience a data breach. It is important to note that the term “covered entities” in the proposed legislation is much broader and applies to persons or business entities that acquire or use personally identifiable information.

Investigation and Reporting

Under SB318, a covered entity is required to investigate any data breach and in some instances report the breach. The investigation must include:

  1.  an assessment of the nature and scope of the breach,
  2.  identification of any sensitive personally identifying information involved and the individuals involved,
  3.  a determination as to whether the information was acquired by an unauthorized individual and could result in substantial harm, and
  4.  identify and implement measures to restore security and confidentiality of the system involved in the breach.

It is the second factor that determines whether the breach is reportable:  Is the sensitive information reasonably believed to have been acquired by an unauthorized person? And is the unauthorized acquisition reasonably likely to cause substantial harm to the individuals?

The law sets forth four factors to consider when evaluating whether the information is “reasonably believed” to have been acquired by an unauthorized individual. In making this determination, the covered entity must evaluate “indications that the information is in the physical possession and control of a person without valid authorization, such as a lost or stolen computer or other device containing information; indications that the information has been downloaded or copied; indications that the information was used by an unauthorized person, such as fraudulent accounts opened or instances of identity theft reported; and whether the information has been made public.” Unfortunately, the law does not provide guidance on whether the breach is reasonably likely to cause substantial harm to the affected individual.

Even if a breach is not a reportable event, the covered entity must maintain relevant records for at least five years. For instance, if the covered entity determines the breach is not reasonably likely to cause substantial harm then no notification is required, but the entity should keep all records related to the breach and their determination that notification was not necessary for five years following the incident.

Required Security Measures

The proposed legislation also requires covered entities to implement “reasonable security measures” to protect an individual’s data.  Similar to HIPAA, the bill requires the covered entity to designate an employee to coordinate security measures (i.e. HIPAA Security Officer) and to identify risks of data breaches. In recognizing that not all covered entities face the same risks or have the same resources, the required “reasonable” security measures should take into account the size of the covered entity, the amount of data maintained and stored by the covered entity and the cost to implement security measures. Good news for healthcare providers, if a healthcare provider has performed the necessary security and risk assessments required under HIPAA, it should easily meet the standards required in SB318.

Information that Triggers Notification

Not all information qualifies as “sensitive personally identifiable information.” To meet this definition, the accessed information must consist of the individual’s first name or initial and last name in combination with any one of these data elements:

  • A non-truncated (or shortened) Social Security or tax identification number;
  • Non-truncated driver’s license, state-issued identification card number, passport number, military identification number or any unique, government-issued number used to verify identity;
  • A financial account, credit or debit card number along with a required security code, expiration date, PIN, access code or password necessary to access a financial account or conduct a transaction;
  • Individual medical or mental history or treatment information;
  • A health insurance policy or identification number; and
  • A username or email address along with a password or security question and answer that gives access to an online account that is likely to contain sensitive personal information.

Elements and Method of Notification

If the investigation concludes that notification must be made, the covered entity must provide notification as “expeditiously as possible but no more than 45 days after the determination of the breach. The notification may be made by mail or email and must include the following elements: 

  • The date, estimated date, or estimated date range of the breach;
  • A description of the sensitive personally identifying information that was acquired by an unauthorized person as part of the breach;
  • A general description of the actions taken by a covered entity to restore the security and confidentiality of the personal information involved in the breach;
  • A general description of steps a consumer can take to protect himself or herself from identity theft; and
  • Information that the individual can use to contact the covered entity to inquire about the breach.

Penalties

The legislation also includes penalties for failing to provide the required notifications, including a potential violation of the Alabama Deceptive Trade Practices Act (“ADTPA”). The Deceptive Trade Practice Act penalties would apply for willful or reckless disregard of the notification requirements. Civil money penalties are capped at $5,000 per day for each consecutive day the covered entity fails to comply with the notice provisions and there is a $500,000 cap for violations under the ADTPA. A violation does not constitute a criminal offense and does not provide for a private right of action.  In other words, a patient/consumer cannot sue the covered entity for the breach.

The bill is currently pending before the Alabama House of Representatives, bill number HB410.

Article contributed by Burr & Forman, LLP. Burr & Forman, LLP, is a partner with the Medical Association. Please read other articles from Burr & Forman, LLP, here.

Posted in: Legal Watch

Leave a Comment (0) →