Showing posts with label IRS Audits. Show all posts

Insurance companies use captives to mislead regulators.

Lance Wallach

Consumers have been cheated by some life Insurance companies repeatedly over the years. For instance some companies had used what the IRS called abusive tax shelters to sell large amounts of life insurance. When the IRS became aware of the situation the consumers were issued very large fines. For the last five years some life insurance companies have doubled their use of another tool to mislead consumers.

Many life insurance companies are using captive insurance to alter their books and look better. This could lead to another taxpayer bailout and insurance companies being taken over. This would put benefits in policies at risk for some policyholders.

By using a captive many insurance companies allow the companies to describe themselves as richer and stronger. This misleads regulators, the ratings agency and consumers who rely on rating. The NY insurance dept. said the insurance based in New York had burnished their books by $48 billion using captive insurance companies, often owned by the insurers.

I have been writing about some problems with captives for years, and this is one of the problems. The use of a captive to mislead people is not what captives are for, but some of them do this.

Insurance regulation is based on solvency. Because the transactions of using captives make companies look richer than they normally would be, so insurance companies are diverting reserves to other uses like executive compensation and stockholder dividends to try to raise the price of their stock. This is not a problem with mutual insurance companies where the insured’s are the stockholders.

By using a captive and trying to hide the fact, some insurance companies artificially increase their risk based capital ratios. These ratios are an important measurement of solvency.

Life insurer’s use of captive to shift obligations from their balance sheets has nearly doubled over the last few years. My concern is that the transactions of using captives do not accomplish the stated goal of transferring risk. Of course the insurance companies argue the opposite. Google Lance Wallach for more articles on captives.

Some of the largest life insurance groups are MetLife, ING, Prudential, A.I.G., AEGON, Hartford, Manulife, Lincoln National, and ASA.

Insurance companies have been playing games for years. To sell more insurance many insurance companies have sold 419 and other plans that the IRS has called abusive transactions. Even after the IRS went after the buyers with large fines the insurance companies continued to sell life insurance inside of these plans. They also sold abusive 412i policies in the past with the same result. Now they are selling so called sections 79 plans which the IRS is looking at. As an expert witness in these types of cases my side has never lost a case.

Using captives is just the latest plan that many insurance companies are now using to look better. The state of NY is trying to do something about this. Most other states have not yet taken notice.

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.

Captive Insurance Buyer Beware

Hg Experts

Legal Experts Directory

Captive Insurance Buyer Beware

By Lance Wallach, CLU, CHFC Abusive Tax Shelter, Listed Transaction, Reportable Transaction Expert Witness

Is a captive insurance cell the way to go? - Accounting Today - Captive Insurance: Achieve large tax and cost reductions by renting a “CAPTIVE”. Most accountants and small business owners are unfamiliar with a great way to reduce taxes and expenses. By either creating or sharing “a captive insurance company”, substantial tax and cost savings will benefit the small business owner.

Over 80% of Fortune 500 companies take advantage of some kind of captive insurance company arrangement. They set up their own insurance companies to provide coverage when they think outside insurers are charging too much, or coverage is simply unavailable. The parent company creates a captive so that it has a self-financing option for buying insurance. The captive then either retains the risk of providing insurance or pays reinsurers (companies that reinsure insurers) to take the risk.

If you buy insurance from a standard insurance company, your money buys a service, but the money is spent and gone forever. When you utilize or “rent a captive”, your money buys a service but it is invested with a good possibility of a return.

In the event of a claim, the company pays claims from its captive or from its reinsurer. To keep costs down, captives are often based in places where there is favorable tax treatment and less onerous regulation (i.e. Vermont, South Carolina, and Bermuda).

Optimum utilization of a captive by a small business, medical practice, or professional.

The best way for a small business, medical practice, etc., to take advantage of captive benefits is to share or rent a large captive. You can significantly decrease your costs of insurance and obtain tax deductions at the same time. There are, as well, significant tax advantages to renting a large captive as opposed to owning a captive.

The advantages of “renting a captive” become apparent when you consider that the single parent captive may be forced to use less than adequate standards or marginal service so they can meet the financial requirements associated with the initial general licensing and administrative costs of establishment. Additionally, when renting a large captive, the captive bears the burden of initial capital commitment and protects reinsurers from runaway claims and unnecessary losses through their underwriting protocols and claims management practices, all at significant savings to the small business owner.

Other advantages include low policy fees and no capital responsibilities to meet solvency requirements or annual management and maintenance costs. By renting a large captive, you only pay a pro rata fee to cover all administrative expenses for the captive insurance company. Another significant advantage of renting a large captive is the ability to take a loan. It is illegal for an individual captive to make loans to subscribers. When renting a large captive, however, the individual subscriber has no ownership interest, and this difference makes it legal for a rented captive to make loans to individual subscribers. So you can make a tax deductible contribution, and then take back money tax free. Operation of an individual stand alone captive insurance company may not achieve the type of cost savings that a small business could obtain by renting a large captive. To rent a large captive, your company simply fills out some forms. Renting a captive requires no significant financial commitment beyond the payment of premiums.

Buyer Beware

As with many strategies to enjoy tax savings and advantages, you must to do this correctly. IRS and other problems have happened, in the past, to those that have done this improperly or abusively. You probably want to work with a large captive that already has over fifty million in assets and is being rented by at least 200 different companies. Also, you’ll not want to own or control any part of the captive. As an unrelated party, you can more likely significantly decrease your cost of insurance, eliminate capital requirements, and minimize maintenance costs.

You want to deal with a large captive that meets the risk shifting requirements of IRS Revenue Ruling 2005-40. Be cautious about setting up your own small captive. In addition to all the costs, a small captive may find that the expense of defending itself from regulatory oversight is much greater than any benefits received.

Lance Wallach, National Society of Accountants Speaker of the Year and member of the AICPA faculty of teaching professionals, is a frequent speaker on retirement plans, abusive tax shelters, financial, international tax, and estate planning. He writes about 412(i), 419, Section79, FBAR and captive insurance plans. He speaks at more than ten conventions annually, writes for more than 50 publications, is quoted regularly in the press and has been featured on television and radio financial talk shows including NBC, National Public Radio’s “All Things Considered” and others. Lance has written numerous books including “Protecting Clients from Fraud, Incompetence and Scams,” published by John Wiley and Sons, Bisk Education’s “CPA’s Guide to Life Insurance and Federal Estate and Gift Taxation,” as well as the AICPA best-selling books, including “Avoiding Circular 230 Malpractice Traps and Common Abusive Small Business Hot Spots.” He does expert witness testimony and has never lost a case. Contact him at 516.938.5007, wallachinc@gmail.com or visit www.taxadvisorexpert.com.

While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of this publication, it is not intended to provide legal advice as individual situations will differ and should be discussed with an expert and/or lawyer. For specific technical or legal advice on the information provided and related topics, please contact the author.

Section 79, captive insurance, 412i, 419, audits, problems and lawsuits

Published By

HG Experts.com

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.

Lance Wallach, National Society of Accountants Speaker of the Year and member of the AICPA faculty of teaching professionals, is a frequent speaker on retirement plans, abusive tax shelters, financial, international tax, and estate planning. He writes about 412(i), 419, Section79, FBAR and captive insurance plans. He speaks at more than ten conventions annually, writes for more than 50 publications, is quoted regularly in the press and has been featured on television and radio financial talk shows including NBC, National Public Radio’s “All Things Considered” and others. Lance has written numerous books including “Protecting Clients from Fraud, Incompetence and Scams,” published by John Wiley and Sons, Bisk Education’s “CPA’s Guide to Life Insurance and Federal Estate and Gift Taxation,” as well as the AICPA best-selling books, including “Avoiding Circular 230 Malpractice Traps and Common Abusive Small Business Hot Spots.” He does expert witness testimony and has never lost a case. Contact him at 516.938.5007, wallachinc@gmail.com or visit www.taxadvisorexpert.com.

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Series LLCs and Cell Companies

Internal Revenue Bulletin: 2010-45

November 8, 2010

REG-119921-09

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Series LLCs and Cell Companies

Background

AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION:

Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY:

This document contains proposed regulations regarding the classification for Federal tax purposes of a series of a domestic series limited liability company (LLC), a cell of a domestic cell company, or a foreign series or cell that conducts an insurance business. The proposed regulations provide that, whether or not a series of a domestic series LLC, a cell of a domestic cell company, or a foreign series or cell that conducts an insurance business is a juridical person for local law purposes, for Federal tax purposes it is treated as an entity formed under local law. Classification of a series or cell that is treated as a separate entity for Federal tax purposes generally is determined under the same rules that govern the classification of other types of separate entities. The proposed regulations provide examples illustrating the application of the rule. The proposed regulations will affect domestic series LLCs; domestic cell companies; foreign series, or cells that conduct insurance businesses; and their owners.

DATES:

Written or electronic comments and requests for a public hearing must be received by December 13, 2010.

ADDRESSES:

Send submissions to: CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-119921-09), Room 5203, Internal Revenue Service, PO Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, DC 20044. Submissions may be hand-delivered Monday through Friday between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. to CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-119921-09), Courier’s Desk, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, or sent electronically, via the Federal eRulemaking portal at www.regulations.gov (IRS REG-119921-09)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

1. Introduction

A number of states have enacted statutes providing for the creation of entities that may establish series, including limited liability companies (series LLCs). In general, series LLC statutes provide that a limited liability company may establish separate series. Although series of a series LLC generally are not treated as separate entities for state law purposes and, thus, cannot have members, each series has “associated” with it specified members, assets, rights, obligations, and investment objectives or business purposes. Members’ association with one or more particular series is comparable to direct ownership by the members in such series, in that their rights, duties, and powers with respect to the series are direct and specifically identified. If the conditions enumerated in the relevant statute are satisfied, the debts, liabilities, and obligations of one series generally are enforceable only against the assets of that series and not against assets of other series or of the series LLC.

Certain jurisdictions have enacted statutes providing for entities similar to the series LLC. For example, certain statutes provide for the chartering of a legal entity (or the establishment of cells) under a structure commonly known as a protected cell company, segregated account company or segregated portfolio company (cell company). A cell company may establish multiple accounts, or cells, each of which has its own name and is identified with a specific participant, but generally is not treated under local law as a legal entity distinct from the cell company. The assets of each cell are statutorily protected from the creditors of any other cell and from the creditors of the cell company.

Under current law, there is little specific guidance regarding whether for Federal tax purposes a series (or cell) is treated as an entity separate from other series or the series LLC (or other cells or the cell company, as the case may be), or whether the company and all of its series (or cells) should be treated as a single entity.

Notice 2008-19, 2008-1 C.B. 366 requested comments on proposed guidance concerning issues that arise if arrangements entered into by a cell constitute insurance for Federal income tax purposes. The notice also requested comments on the need for guidance concerning similar segregated arrangements that do not involve insurance. The IRS received a number of comments requesting guidance for similar arrangements not involving insurance, including series LLCs and cell companies. These comments generally recommended that series and cells should be treated as separate entities for Federal tax purposes if they are established under a statute with provisions similar to the series LLC statutes currently in effect in several states. The IRS and Treasury Department generally agree with these comments. See §601.601(d)(2)(ii)(b).

Captive Insurance and Other Tax Reduction Strategies – The Good, Bad, and Ugly

By Lance Wallach May 14th

Every accountant knows that increased cash flow and cost savings are critical for businesses. What is uncertain is the best path to recommend to garner these benefits.

Over the past decade business owners have been overwhelmed by a plethora of choices designed to reduce the cost of providing employee benefits while increasing their own retirement savings. The solutions ranged from traditional pension and profit sharing plans to more advanced strategies.

Some strategies, such as IRS section 419 and 412(i) plans, used life insurance as vehicles to bring about benefits. Unfortunately, the high life insurance commissions (often 90% of the contribution, or more) fostered an environment that led to aggressive and noncompliant plans.

The result has been thousands of audits and an IRS task force seeking out tax shelter promotion. For unknowing clients, the tax consequences are enormous. For their accountant advisors, the liability may be equally extreme.

Recently, there has been an explosion in the marketing of a financial product called Captive Insurance. These so called “Captives” are typically small insurance companies designed to insure the risks of an individual business under IRS code section 831(b). When properly designed, a business can make tax-deductible premium payments to a related-party insurance company. Depending on circumstances, underwriting profits, if any, can be paid out to the owners as dividends, and profits from liquidation of the company may be taxed as capital gains.

While captives can be a great cost saving tool, they also are expensive to build and manage. Also, captives are allowed to garner tax benefits because they operate as real insurance companies. Advisors and business owners who misuse captives or market them as estate planning tools, asset protection vehicles, tax deferral or other benefits not related to the true business purpose of an insurance company face grave regulatory and tax consequences.

A recent concern is the integration of small captives with life insurance policies. Small captives under section 831(b) have no statutory authority to deduct life premiums. Also, if a small captive uses life insurance as an investment, the cash value of the life policy can be taxable at corporate rates, and then will be taxable again when distributed. The consequence of this double taxation is to devastate the efficacy of the life insurance, and it extends serious liability to any accountant who recommends the plan or even signs the tax return of the business that pays premiums to the captive.

The IRS is aware that several large insurance companies are promoting their life insurance policies as investments with small captives. The outcome looks eerily like that of the 419 and 412(i) plans mentioned above.

Remember, if something looks too good to be true, it usually is. There are safe and conservative ways to use captive insurance structures to lower costs and obtain benefits for businesses. And, some types of captive insurance products do have statutory protection for deducting life insurance premiums (although not 831(b) captives). Learning what works and is safe is the first step an accountant should take in helping his or her clients use these powerful, but highly technical insurance tools.

Lance Wallach speaks and writes extensively about VEBAs, retirement plans, and tax reduction strategies. He speaks at more than 70 conventions annually, writes for 50 publications, and was the National Society of Accountants Speaker of the Year. Contact him at 516.938.5007 or visit www.vebaplan.com.

The information provided herein is not intended as legal, accounting, financial or any other type of advice for any specific individual or other entity. You should contact an appropriate professional for any such advice.

412i Tax Shelter Fraud Litigation - How It Works

Lance Wallach

PARTIES:

Typically, these transactions will include an Insurance company, accountant, tax attorney, and a promoter (someone with an insurance background, perhaps an actuary, who knows how to structure the policy itself). These groups will use insurance brokerages and sub-agents (licensed in the various states) to sell the policies themselves.

INSURANCE COMPANIES

AMERICAN GENERAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY® INDIANAPOLIS LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY®

HARTFORD LIFE AND ANNUITY INSURANCE COMPANY® PACIFIC LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY®

BANKERS LIFE and OTHERS®?

4121iHOW THESE PLANS WORK:

In the late 1990’s, the individuals and groups above devised a scheme to sell abusive tax shelters under the auspices of Section 412(i) of the tax code. A 412(i) is a defined benefit pension plan. It provides specific retirement benefits to participants once they reach retirement and must contain assets sufficient to pay those benefits. A 412(i) plan differs from other defined benefit pension plans in that it must be funded exclusively by the purchase of individual life insurance products. To create a 412(i) plan, there must be a trust to hold the assets. The employer funds the plan by making cash contributions to the trust, and the Code allows the employer to take a tax deduction in the amount of the contributions, i.e. the entire amount.

The trust uses the contributed funds to purchase some combination of life insurance products (insurance or annuities) for the plan. As the plan participants retire, the trust will usually sell the policies for their present cash value and purchase annuities with the proceeds. The revenue stream from the annuities pays the specified retirement benefit to plan participants.

These defendants (with the aid and knowledge of the insurance companies) used the traditional structure and sold life insurance policies with excessively high premiums. The trust then uses the large cash contributions to pay high insurance premiums and the employer takes a deduction for the sum of those large contributions. As you might expect, these policies were designed with excessively high fees or “loads” which provided exorbitant commissions to the insurance companies and the agents who sold the products.

The policies that were sold were termed Springing Cash Value Policies. They had no cash value for the first 5-7 years, after which they had significant cash value. Under this scheme, after 5-7 years, and just before the cash value sprung, the participant purchases the policy from the trust for the policy’s surrender value. In theory, you have a tax free transaction.

The IRS does not recognize the tax benefit of such a plan and has repeatedly issued announcements indicating that such plans are contrary to federal tax laws and regulations.

I am not an attorney but I learned some of the above information from attorney’s Mr. Ford’s website.

Lance Wallach, National Society of Accountants Speaker of the Year and member of the AICPA faculty of teaching professionals, is a frequent speaker on retirement plans, financial and estate planning, and abusive tax shelters. He writes about 412(i), 419, and captive insurance plans. He speaks at more than ten conventions annually, writes for over fifty publications, is quoted regularly in the press and has been featured on television and radio financial talk shows including NBC, National Public Radio's All Things Considered, and others. Lance has written numerous books including Protecting Clients from Fraud, Incompetence and Scams published by John Wiley and Sons, Bisk Education's CPA's Guide to Life Insurance and Federal Estate and Gift Taxation, as well as AICPA best-selling books, including Avoiding Circular 230 Malpractice Traps and Common Abusive Small Business Hot Spots. He does expert witness testimony and has never lost a case. Contact him at 516.938.5007, wallachinc@gmail.com or visit www.taxaudit419.com and www.taxlibrary.us

IRS Tax Audits, 419 and 412i plans, Tax resolution services

IRS Audits Focus on Captive Insurance Plans - Lance Wallach

Abusive Tax Shelters & 419 Plans Lawsuits: 412i Tax Shelter Fraud Litigation - How It Works

Abusive Tax Shelters & 419 Plans Lawsuits: 412i Tax Shelter Fraud Litigation - How It Works: Lance Wallach PARTIES: Typically, these transactions will include an Insurance company, accountant, tax attorney, and a promoter ...

Lance Wallach

Shared publicly - Feb 17, 2014

#Lawsuits

412i, 419, Lawsuits, IRS Audits. Lance Wallach, expert witness.
419, 412i, plans are being audited by the IRS. Lawsuits are the result. Small businesses facing audits and potentially huge tax penalties over certain types of retirement plans are filing lawsuits against those who marketed, designed and sold the plans. The...

412i, 419, Lawsuits, IRS Audits. Lance Wallach, expert witness.

wewanttoprofileyouinnewbook.blogspot.com

Section 79 Plans: Section 79, Captive Insurance, IRS Audits and Laws...

Section 79 Plans: Section 79, Captive Insurance, IRS Audits and Laws...: Hg Experts Legal Experts Directory By Lance Wallach, CLU, CHFC Abusive Tax Shelter, Listed Transaction...

Tuesday, November 27, 2012

CJA and associates 419 412i section 79 scam audits lawsuits

38 comments:

Lance WallachJune 20, 2013 at 9:41 AM

google lance wallach for more
ReplyDelete
Replies
1. Lance WallachJanuary 22, 2014 at 10:46 AM
  
  google lance wallach and whoever you are working with, who do you think is better?
  as an expert lance wallach has never lost a case www.lancewallach.com
  419 412i plans IRS audits lawsuits
  Lance Wallach
  director at taxaudit419.com

IRS Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program Reopens

Offshore International Today

By Lance Wallach, CLU, CHFC

Abusive Tax Shelter, Listed Transaction, Reportable Transaction Expert Witness

Today, the Internal Revenue Service reopened the offshore voluntary disclosure program to help people hiding offshore accounts get current with their taxes. Additionally, the IRS revealed the collection of more than $4.4 billion so far from the two previous international programs.

The Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program (OVDP) was reopened following continued strong interest from taxpayers and tax practitioners after the closure of the 2011 and 2009 programs. The third offshore program comes as the IRS continues working on a wide range of international tax issues and follows ongoing efforts with the Justice Department to pursue criminal prosecution of international tax evasion. This program will remain open indefinitely until otherwise announced.

Lance Wallach and his associates have received thousands of phone calls from concerned clients with questions about the prior programs. Some of Lance’s associates are still very busy helping people with the last program. Not a single person has been audited and most are pleased with the results and are now able to sleep easily without worrying about the IRS. According to Lance, it requires years of experience to obtain a good result from the program.

He suggests using a CPA-certified, ex-IRS agent with lots of international tax experience. While this is not a requirement to file under the program, Lance has heard many horror stories from people who have tried to file by themselves or who have used inexperienced accountants.

“Our focus on offshore tax evasion continues to produce strong, substantial results for the nation’s taxpayers,” said IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman. “We have billions of dollars in hand from our previous efforts, and we have more people wanting to come in and get right with the government. This new program makes good sense for taxpayers still hiding assets overseas and for the nation’s tax system.”

The new program is similar to the 2011 program in many ways, but it has a few key differences. Unlike last year, there is no set deadline for people to apply. However, the terms of the program could change at any time going forward. For example, the IRS may increase penalties in the program for all or some taxpayers or defined classes of taxpayers – or decide to end the program entirely at any point.

“As we've said all along, people need to come in and get right with us before we find you,” Shulman said. “We are following more leads and the risk for people who do not come in continues to increase.”

The third offshore effort accompanies another announcement that Shulman made today, that the IRS has collected $3.4 billion so far from people who participated in the 2009 offshore program. That figure reflects closures of about 95 percent of the cases from the 2009 program. On top of that, the IRS has collected an additional $1 billion from up front payments required under the 2011 program. That number will grow as the IRS processes the 2011 cases.

In all, the IRS has seen 33,000 voluntary disclosures from the 2009 and 2011 offshore initiatives. Since the 2011 program closed last September, hundreds of taxpayers have come forward to make voluntary disclosures. Those who come in after the closing of the 2011 program will be able to be treated under the provisions of the new OVDP program.

The overall penalty structure for the new program is the same for 2011, except for taxpayers in the highest penalty category.

The new program’s penalty framework requires individuals to pay a penalty of 27.5 percent of the highest aggregate balance in foreign bank accounts/entities or the value of foreign assets during the eight full tax years prior to the disclosure. That is up from 25 percent in the 2011 program. Some taxpayers will be eligible for 5 or 12.5 percent penalties; these remain the same in the new program as in 2011.

Participants must file all original and amended tax returns and include payment for back-taxes and interest for up to eight years as well as paying accuracy-related and/or delinquency penalties.

Participants face a 27.5 percent penalty, but taxpayers in limited situations can qualify for a 5 percent penalty. Smaller offshore accounts will face a 12.5 percent penalty. People whose offshore accounts or assets did not surpass $75,000 in any calendar year covered by the new OVDP will qualify for this lower rate. As under the prior programs, taxpayers who feel that the penalty is disproportionate may opt instead to be examined.

The IRS recognizes that its success in offshore enforcement and in the disclosure programs has raised awareness related to tax filing obligations. This includes awareness by dual citizens and others who may be delinquent in filing, but owe no U.S. tax.

Lance Wallach, National Society of Accountants Speaker of the Year and member of the AICPA faculty of teaching professionals, is a frequent speaker on retirement plans, abusive tax shelters, financial, international tax, and estate planning. He writes about 412(i), 419, Section79, FBAR, and captive insurance plans. He speaks at more than ten conventions annually, writes for over fifty publications, is quoted regularly in the press and has been featured on television and radio financial talk shows including NBC, National Public Radio’s All Things Considered, and others. Lance has written numerous books including Protecting Clients from Fraud, Incompetence and Scams published by John Wiley and Sons, Bisk Education’s CPA’s Guide to Life Insurance and Federal Estate and Gift Taxation, as well as the AICPA best-selling books, including Avoiding Circular 230 Malpractice Traps and Common Abusive Small Business Hot Spots. He does expert witness testimony and has never lost a case. Contact him at 516.938.5007, wallachinc@gmail.com or visit www.taxadvisorexpert.com.

Some 419 Insurance Welfare Benefit Plans Continue To Get Accountants Into Trouble

by Lance Wallach

Published in: The Finance Toolbox

Popular so-called "419 Insurance Welfare Benefit Plans," sold by most insurance professionals, are getting accountants and their clients into more and more trouble. A CPA who is approached by a client about one of the abusive arrangements and/or situations to be described and discussed in this article must exercise the utmost degree of caution, not only on behalf of the client, but for his/her own good as well. The penalties noted in this article can also be applied to practitioners who prepare and/or sign returns that fail to properly disclose listed transactions, including those discussed herein.

On October 17, 2007, the IRS issued Notice 2007-83, Notice 2007-84, and Revenue Ruling 2007-65. Notice 2007-83 essentially lists the characteristics of welfare benefit plans that the Service regards as listed transactions. Put simply, to be a listed transaction, a plan cannot rely on the union exception set forth in IRC Section 419A(f)(5), there must be cash value life insurance within the plan and excessive tax deductions for life insurance, in excess of what may be permitted by Sections 419 and 419A, must have been claimed.

In Notice 2007-84, the Service expressed concern with plans that provide all or a substantial portion of benefits to owners and/or key and highly compensated employees. The notice identified numerous specific concerns, among them:

1. The granting of loans to participants
2. Providing deferred compensation
3. Plan terminations that result in the distribution of assets rather than being used post-
retirement, as originally established.
4. Permitting the transfer of life insurance policies to participants.

Alternative tax treatment may well be in the offing for such arrangements, as the IRS intends to re-characterize such arrangements as dividends, non-qualified deferred compensation (under IRC Section 404(a)(5) or Section 409A), split-dollar life insurance arrangements, or disqualified benefits pursuant to Section 4976. Taxpayers participating in these listed transactions should have, in most cases, already disclosed such participation to the Service. Those who have not should do so at the earliest possible moment. Failure to disclose can result in severe penalties – up to $100,000 for
individuals and $200,000 for corporations.

Finally, Revenue Ruling 2007-65 focused on situations where cash value life insurance is
purchased on owner employees and other key employees, while only term insurance is offered to the rank and file. These are sold as 419(e), 419A (f)(6), and 419 plans. Life insurance premiums are not inherently tax deductible and authority must be found in Section 79 to justify such a deduction. Section 264(a), in fact, specifically disallows tax deductions for life insurance, at least in some cases. And moreover, the Service declared, interposition of a trust does not change the nature of the transaction.

The information provided herein is not intended as legal, accounting, financial or any other type of advice for any specific individual or other entity. You should contact an appropriate professional for any such advice.

Lance Wallach, CLU, ChFC, CIMC, speaks and writes extensively about financial planning, retirement plans, and tax reduction strategies. He speaks at more than 70 national conventions annually and writes for more than 50 national publications. For more information and additional articles on these subjects, visit www.taxadvisorexperts.org or call 516-938-5007.

IRS Auditing 412i, 419e

Plan Administrator Frustrated With IRS Attacks on 412i, 412e Plans

IRS Auditing 412(i) Plans

Backlash on too-good-to-be-true insurance plan

No Shelter Here September 2011

Backlash on too-good-to-be-true insurance plan

By: Lance Wallach

During the past few years, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has fined many business owners hundreds of thousands of dollars for participating in several particular types of insurance plans.
The 412(i), 419, captive insurance, and section 79 plans were marketed as a way for small-business owners to set up retirement, welfare benefit plans, or other tax-deductible programs while leveraging huge tax savings, but the IRS put most of them on a list of abusive tax shelters, listed transactions, or similar transactions, etc., and has more recently focused audits on them. Many accountants are unaware of the issues surrounding these plans, and many big-name insurance companies are still encouraging participation in them.

Seems Attractive

The plans are costly up-front, but your money builds over time, and there’s a large payout if the money is removed before death. While many business owners have retirement plans, they also must care for their employees. With one of these plans, business owners are not required to give their workers anything.

Gotcha

Although small business has taken a recessionary hit and owners may not be spending big sums on insurance now, an IRS task force is auditing people who bought these as early as 2004. There is no statute of limitations.
The IRS also requires participants to file Form 8886 informing the IRS of participation in this “abusive transaction.” Failure to file or to file incorrectly will cost the business owner interest and penalties. Plus, you’ll pay back whatever you claimed for a deduction, and there are additional fines — possibly 70% of the tax benefit you claim in a year. And, if your accountant does not confidentially inform on you, he or she will get fined $100,000 by the IRS. Further, the IRS can freeze assets if you don’t pay and can fine you on a corporate and a personal level despite the type of business entity you have.

Legal Wrangling

Currently, small businesses facing audits and potentially huge tax penalties over these plans are filing lawsuits against those who marketed, designed, and sold the plans. Find out promptly if you have one of these plans and seek advice from a knowledgeable accountant to help you properly file Form 8886.
—Lance Wallach, National Society of Accountants Speaker of the Year and member of the AICPA faculty of teaching professionals, is a frequent speaker on retirement plans, financial and estate planning, and abusive tax shelters. www.taxaudit419.com, www.vebaplan.org, and www.section79plan.org
This article is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as specific legal or financial advice.

Re-entering The Tax System

Taxlanta.org July 2011

by Lance Wallach

Taxpayers who have failed to file federal tax returns for three years or more and owe more than $75,000 in tax should find this section particularly interesting. (i.e., pure tax ― no interest, no penalties).

Rule No. 1:

Under no circumstances should you attempt to re-enter the tax system on your own. Tax evasion, failing to file a timely tax return, and perjury are very serious tax crimes, and one mistake can send you to federal prison for a very long time. Your voluntary admission of a tax crime is similar to Pandora’s box; once the lid has been opened there is nothing you can do to get it closed again. The biggest mistake that most people make is hiring advisors that do not specialize in failure-to-file cases and have little or no knowledge of the IRS/Criminal Investigation Division (IRS/CID) procedures and criminal-tax violations.

Rule No. 2

Under no circumstance should you assume that the IRS/CID and the U.S. Attorney’s Office (USAO) will grant you immunity from prosecution simply because you volunteered to come forward, bare your soul, and beg for forgiveness. The IRS terminated its guaranteed non-prosecution policy for voluntary disclosure of tax crimes in 1961. If you have not filed federal tax returns for three years or more and owe more than $75,000 in back taxes, then you will likely receive a visit from the IRS/CID six to eighteen months after you file your delinquent tax returns. The “reward” you get for filing true and correct delinquent tax returns is that you may be able to avoid additional perjury charges. But you will still have to pay a very large tax liability, which will include interest and a whopping 75% civil tax fraud penalty. Your full disclosure will be appreciated, and under current IRS guidelines you “may” avoid criminal prosecution only if you pay the entire amount due.

Call our office today for a free 3-5 minute consultation with Lance Wallach, the nation’s foremost tax expert, or visit www.experttaxadvisors.org.

Rule No. 3

You must hire the best tax advisors that money can buy. Preferably you will want someone with at least 23 years experience handling failure-to-file cases before the IRS, and preferably this same person will have experience as a former IRS Special Agent. That’s where we come in.

Last year I received over a thousand phone calls from business owners, accountants and other professionals who were in trouble with the IRS over a recent large fine. If you were in what the IRS considers an abusive, listed or similar to transaction, you face a hundred thousand dollar IRS fine under IRS code 6707A. The IRS is attacking thousands of people for either being in, selling, or advising about, various types of plans, which are primarily marketed by insurance professionals.

If you are or were in a 412i, 419, captive insurance, or section 79 plan, you should immediately file under 6707A protectively. If you have already filed you should find someone who knows what he is doing to review the forms. I only know of two people who know how to properly file. The IRS instructions are vague. If a taxpayer files wrong, or fills out the forms wrong he still gets the fine. I have had hundreds of phone calls from people in that situation.

Lance Wallach, National Society of Accountants Speaker of the Year and member of the AICPA faculty of teaching professionals, is a frequent speaker on retirement plans, financial and estate planning, and abusive tax shelters. He writes about 412(i), 419, and captive insurance plans. He speaks at more than ten conventions annually, writes for over fifty publications, is quoted regularly in the press and has been featured on television and radio financial talk shows including NBC, National Public Radio’s All Things Considered, and others. Lance has written numerous books including Protecting Clients from Fraud, Incompetence and Scams published by John Wiley and Sons, Bisk Education’s CPA’s Guide to Life Insurance and Federal Estate and Gift Taxation, as well as AICPA best-selling books, including Avoiding Circular 230 Malpractice Traps and Common Abusive Small Business Hot Spots. He does expert witness testimony and has never lost a case. Contact him at 516.938.5007, wallachinc@gmail.com or visit www.taxadvisorexpert.com.