foreign trust

House passes tax reform bill (11-16-17)

House passes tax reform bill (11-16-17)

In a 227-205 vote today, the House passed the tax reform bill (the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (H.R. 1)). The next hurdle will be passage of the Senate bill.

Here are a few of the differences between the bills:

  • The Senate bill's maximum individual rate is 38.5%, while the House bill's maximum is 39.6%; 
  • The Senate bill has no itemized deduction for property taxes, while the House bill allows up to $10,000;
  • The Senate bill's principal residence mortgage interest loan balance limit remains at $1 million with no equity debt allowed, while the House bill reduces the loan balance to $500,000 on the principal residence only with no equity debt allowed;
  • Under the Senate bill, sole proprietorships, partnerships, and S corporations may deduct 17.4% of their domestic qualified business income, while the House bill has a complex rate structure for these businesses; and
  • Under the Senate bill, there is a flat 20% corporate rate, including personal services, while the House bill has the same corporate rate but taxes personal service businesses at 25%.

House Ways and Means approves amended Tax Cuts and Jobs bill

The House Ways and Means Committee voted 24–16 on Thursday to send the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, H.R. 1, to the full House for a vote. However, the bill, as marked up by the committee, contains many changes from the original version of H.R. 1 released last week. Reportedly, some of these changes were made to reduce the 10-year cost of the bill, and according to a preliminary estimate by the Joint Committee on Taxation, the net effect of the bill as marked up would be to reduce federal revenues by $1.437 trillion over 10 years.

Here is a list of changes in the version of the bill that the House will consider:

  1. The amended bill would provide for a new 9% rate on the first $75,000 in net business taxable income passed through to an active owner or shareholder earning less than $150,000 in taxable income. The 9% rate would be phased out as taxable income approaches $225,000. The lower rate would be phased in over five years: It would be 11% in 2018 and 2019, 10% in 2020 and 2021, and 9% starting in 2022.
  2. The current law rules on self-employment income received from a passthrough entity would be preserved.
  3. The adoption tax credit would be preserved in its current form.
  4. Taxpayers would be required to provide Social Security numbers for children before claiming the enhanced child tax credit.
  5. Rollovers between Sec. 529 education savings accounts and Achieving a Better Life Experience (ABLE) Sec. 529A accounts would be permitted.
  6. The exclusion for qualified moving expense reimbursements would be reinstated but only for members of the Armed Forces on active duty who move because of a military order.
  7. The amendment would lower the dividend-received deduction from 80% to 65% and the 70% rate to 50%.
  8. The amendment would change the limitation on deducting interest by businesses, but only for floor plan financing indebtedness (short-term debt used by retailers to finance high-cost items such as cars). Full expensing would not be available to these types of businesses.
  9. The amendment would modify the treatment of S corporations that convert to C corporations after the bill is passed by allowing any Sec. 481 adjustment to be taken into account over a six-year period (Sec. 481 adjustments usually must be taken into account over four years).
  10. For tax years after 2023, taxpayers would be required to amortize Sec. 174 research and experimentation expenses over five years (15 years for research outside the United States).
  11. The amendment would disallow a current deduction for litigation costs advanced by attorneys representing clients on a contingent basis until the contingency is resolved.
  12. The amendment would preserve current law treatment of nonqualified deferred compensation.
  13. The amendment would clarify that holders of restricted stock units cannot make Sec. 83(b) elections.
  14. The amendment would change the 12% and 5% rates on repatriated foreign income to 14% and 7%.
  15.  The amendment would eliminate the markup on deemed expenses for foreign purposes, permit a foreign tax credit of 80% of the foreign taxes paid, and make other changes to the foreign tax credit calculation provisions in H.R. 1.
  16. The amendment would subject to the 1.4% excise tax on investment income endowment funds held by organizations related to the universities and provide an exclusion from the excise tax for any educational institution unless the fair market value of the institution's assets (other than those assets used directly in carrying out its exempt purpose) is at least $250,000 per student.
  17. The amendment would change the repeal of the Johnson amendment to clarify that all Sec. 501(c)(3) organizations (not just religious organizations) are permitted to engage in political speech if the speech is in the ordinary course of the organization's business and the organization incurs de minimis expenses related to the political speech. 
  18. The amendment would require earned income tax credit claims to properly reflect any net earnings from self-employment, require employers to provide additional information on payroll tax returns, and provide the IRS with additional authority to substantiate earned income amounts.
  19. The amendment would reinstate the $5,000 exclusion from income for employer-provided dependent care assistance through 2022 for children under 13 or spouses or other dependents who are unable to care for themselves.
  20. The amendment would reinstate capital gain treatment for self-created musical works.
  21. The amendment would require partners to hold their partnership interest received for performing services for three years to qualify for capital gain treatment.
  22.  Employees who receive stock options or restricted stock units as compensation for services and later exercise them would be allowed to elect to defer recognition of income for up to five years, if the corporation's stock is not publicly traded.
  23. The amendment would change the foreign base erosion rules.

Source:  https://www.journalofaccountancy.com/news/

Foreign trust DNI, UNI, and the throwback rules: Important tax planning strategies

For U.S.-based investors, offshore trusts were once a highly effective and traditional vehicle for tax planning and asset management. Trusts established for the benefit of U.S. persons, both foreign and domestic, could freely accumulate income and convert it to principal. Eventually, distributions could be made when the tax environment was more favorable, lowering the overall U.S. tax burden of the trust in question.

These practices were seen as abusive. Eventually, in 1954, what would later become known as the "throwback rules" were first put into place. The original rules were a limited solution to the problem because they applied to income accumulated within the last five years of any given trust. The 1954 rules have undergone many changes, growing both stricter and more lenient for domestic trusts at various times, but foreign non-grantor trusts with U.S. beneficiaries have always been highly regulated under the throwback rules. This article focuses on foreign trusts.

Throwback rules

The throwback rules hinge upon the distinction between distributable net income, or DNI, and undistributed net income, or UNI. All of the income earned by a complex foreign non-grantor trust, with some modifications, is regarded as DNI under Sec. 643. To the extent that the income is distributed to a U.S. beneficiary, it is subject to income taxation. However, under the throwback rules, yearly DNI that is not distributed within 65 days of the end of the year becomes reclassified as UNI (Sec. 663(b); Harrison et al. "The Throwback Tax," p. 22 (N.Y. State Bar Ass'n February 2015)). For later years after the accumulation of UNI, any distributions over and above the amount of DNI attributable to the foreign trust will be regarded first as distributions of UNI until any UNI in the trust is exhausted. Only then will distributions from the trust be deemed to be from principal (Secs. 665(b) and 666).

The IRS uses a multistep process to calculate the base tax on accumulation distributions from foreign trusts; this process is found on Schedule J, Accumulation Distribution for Certain Complex Trusts, of Form 1041, U.S. Income Tax Return for Estates and Trusts; Form 4970, Tax on Accumulation Distribution of Trusts; and Part III, "Distributions to a U.S. Person From a Foreign Trust During the Current Tax Year," of Form 3520, Annual Return to Report Transactions With Foreign Trusts and Receipt of Certain Foreign Gifts.

The value of the accumulation distribution is allocated to preceding years in which the amount of DNI exceeded distributions, modified based on the taxes the trust paid that are attributable to that value, and taxed as an increase to income tax within the computation years (see IRS, Instructions for Form 1041 and Schedules A, B, G, J, and K-1 (Jan. 12, 2017); Silverman, "Taxation of Foreign Nongrantor Trusts: Throwback Rule," 23-2 Tax News & Comment 1 (August 2014)). Additionally, an interest charge, essentially a penalty, is added to the tax on the UNI, as determined by a table indexing the applicable years of the throwback tax to a given rate to be applied to the taxable amount (Sec. 668). To make matters worse, the potential tax burden of the throwback rules may equal up to 100% of the value of the accumulation distribution itself (Sec. 668(b)).

Making principal available while avoiding the throwback rules

Mitigating the negative effects of the throwback tax is a crucial concern for any professional involved in planning and administering a foreign nongrantor trust. Where UNI has been allowed to accumulate, the question is how to access the trust principal, which represents "clean capital" for the U.S. beneficiary, without triggering an accumulation distribution. Because the UNI is deemed distributed before principal, to make principal accessible for the beneficiary, it is necessary to find some way to move the UNI out of the trust without the throwback rules applying.

A simple and effective way to do this is to move the trust income out into a foreign subtrust (Harrison, pp. 21–22). These sorts of trust-to-trust distributions, if not carefully planned, could lead to application of the throwback tax; a successful distribution at the trust level, however, avoids bringing the assets within the remit of a U.S. beneficiary while placing the entire accumulation distribution within an offshore entity and, therefore, avoiding any trigger of the throwback tax.

This subtrust should possess a few qualifications to effectively receive the carried-out UNI of the initial trust. For starters, it should afford the trustee absolute discretion to distribute to multiple beneficiaries. This provides a safeguard against vesting issues that might arise from a single-beneficiary foreign trust. There is a risk with single-beneficiary trusts that the IRS might interpret them as vesting the assets in the beneficiary who holds the sole right to gain from the trust, resulting in a deemed distribution to a U.S. beneficiary and the application of the throwback tax. Giving the trustee absolute discretion ensures that no beneficiary has the right to any portion of the trust assets, maintaining the integrity of the trust as an entity. For the trustee of a complex trust granted reasonably broad latitude to act, the creation of and distribution to a subtrust incorporating beneficiaries other than the U.S. beneficiary should be achievable without any asset allocation to the U.S. person in question.

The other consideration that should be taken into account when creating the subtrust is the beneficiaries' character. Foreign beneficiaries are preferable to U.S. beneficiaries to avoid U.S. onshoring. There is a special issue to be aware of with the use of charitable interests for this role, especially for U.S. beneficiaries without clearly identifiable foreign beneficiaries at hand: Should the subtrust be constructed so that all of the discretionary interest in the trust is held by organizations that qualify as exempt charitable organizations, the carrying out of UNI will fail. Contributions to such a trust by the original trust would be treated as a below-the-line deduction rather than a distribution, with the effect being that UNI will still be regarded as present within the trust and distributable to the beneficiary (Sec. 4947). Charitable interests must be paired with noncharitable and, ideally, non-U.S. beneficiaries to carry out the UNI.

It must be noted that distribution to a subtrust only serves to make principal accessible for the beneficiary of the initial trust; it does not eliminate the throwback tax issue. The characterization of the income as UNI will follow it into the subtrust and, with that, the compounding interest rate for applicable years of accumulation. If it is desired that the UNI eventually be distributed to the U.S. beneficiary, prior discussion and planning will be necessary to mitigate the eventual throwback tax burden.

Source: https://www.thetaxadviser.com/newsletters/2017/oct/foreign-trust-dni-uni-throwback-rules.html?utm_source=mnl:cpald&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=06Oct2017