Is A Donor Advised Fund Right for You?

Executive Summary: Setting up a Donor Advised Fund (DAF) for 2017 (before December 31, 2017) and front loading charitable deductions can save you thousands of dollars in taxes immediately, while directing distribution to charities in/for future years. Even if you decide not to establish a DAF, you should consider whether accelerating next year’s charitable contributions to 2017 makes sense for you, especially if you are phased out of itemizing deductions starting next year.

As you’ve heard by now, President Donald Trump has signed the Tax and Jobs Act of 2017, which mostly makes sweeping changes to tax rates and eliminates many deductions starting in 2018. For most households, this means no itemized deductions due to an increased standard deduction ($12,000 for single, $24,000 for married), a limit on the deduction of taxes ($10,000 of income, sales and property taxes combined) and elimination of most miscellaneous itemized deductions.

Many of you give generously to charities every year regardless of the prospect of deducting those contributions. While the changes to the deductiblity of contributions is little changed, the fact that you likely won’t be able to itemize, means that you’ll receive no tax benefit going forward if your contributions plus other itemized deductions don’t exceed your standard deduction.

This means that 2017 may be a year that you’ll want to consider a Donor Advised Fund (DAF) to take advantage of what might be your last year for itemizing, and take a large 2017 deduction for your contribution. The deadline for establishing a DAF is December 31, 2017, though for all intents and purposes, December 29 is the last business day of the year and may be the true deadline.

A DAF is simply an account that you establish with the charitable entity of a well-known custodian (Schwab, Fidelity, Vanguard or TD Ameritrade for example) and to which you make a lump sum contribution to fund future years’ contributions. For example, if you give $2,000 a year to charity, you could fund it with $10,000 today, and direct $2,000 a year to your charities each year while the fund grows tax free. Better yet, if you fund the DAF with long-term appreciated stocks or funds, you’ll get a full deduction for the fair market value of the securities, and never have to report the capital gain on your tax return.

This is right for you if:

  1. You’re willing and able to irrevocably contribute at least $5,000 (some custodians have higher minimums) to a managed account where you direct future contributions to the charities of your choice;
  2. You expect to be phased out of itemized deductions starting in 2018 due to the increased standard deduction and other changes to itemized deductions (see above) or,
  3. You would benefit more from an acceleration of charitable deductions to 2017 (than in future years) due to high income or lower tax rates in the years ahead.

Even if you decide not to establish a DAF, you should consider whether accelerating next year’s charitable contributions to 2017 makes sense for you.

The most common ‘strategy’ for creating a donor-advised fund is relatively straightforward – donor-advised funds are a good fit any time there’s a desire to contribute (and get the tax deduction) now, but make the actual grant to the final charity at some later date. In fact, the whole point of a donor-advised fund is to separate the timing of when the tax deduction occurs from when the charity ultimately receives the money.

Once established, you can add funds to a DAF in future years, and you can take as long as you want to distribute the funds to various charities. Some custodians maintain minimum donations you can make to a charity at any one time, say $50.

The important caveat to remember in all donor-advised fund strategies is that once funds go to the donor-advised fund, they must go to some charity, and cannot be retracted for the donor. The charitable gift to a donor-advised fund is still irrevocable, even if the assets have not yet passed through to the underlying charity. Nonetheless, for those who are ready to make the charitable donation – and want to receive the tax deduction now – the donor-advised fund serves as a useful vehicle to execute charitable giving strategies over time. And it certainly doesn’t hurt that any growth along the way will ultimately accrue tax-free for the charity as well.

If you would like to review your current investment portfolio or discuss setting up a Donor Advised Fund, please don’t hesitate to contact us or visit our website at We are a fee-only fiduciary financial planning firm that always puts your interests first. If you are not a client yet, an initial consultation is complimentary and there is never any pressure or hidden sales pitch. We start with a specific assessment of your personal situation. There is no rush and no cookie-cutter approach. Each client is different, and so is your financial plan and investment objectives.

Tax Bill Provisions to Consider Before You Jingle All the Way

And the award for the busiest profession during the 2017 year-end holiday season goes to… preparers and planners…..the crowd goes wild and applauds loudly. “I’d like to take this opportunity to thank our President, our senate and our House of Representatives for this “gift”. Without their last minute help and effort, no one could have made this Christmas to New Year’s period any busier for us.”

Laughing all the way…

The new tax law hasn’t been fully ratified by the U.S. House and Senate yet, but all indications are that the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 will be sent to the President’s desk in the next two days. As you probably know, the House and Senate versions were somewhat different. What does the new bill look like?

Tax simplification? “Fuggetaboutit!” (think Italian mobster)

Despite the promise of tax “reform” or “simplification,” the bill actually adds hundreds of pages to our tax laws. And the initial idea of reducing the number of tax brackets was apparently tossed aside in the final version; the new bill maintains seven different tax rates: 10%, 12%, 22%, 24%, 32%, 35% and 37%. Most people will see their bracket go down by one to four percentage points, with the higher reductions going to people with higher income. And the tax brackets, going forward, will be indexed to inflation, meaning that the “real” income brackets will remain approximately the same from year to year.

The new brackets break down like this:

Individual Taxpayers

Income $0-$9,525 – 10% of taxable income
$9,526-$38,700 – $952.50 + 12% of the amount over $9,526
$38,701-$82,500 – $4,453 + 22% of the amount over $38,700
$82,501-$157,500 – $14,089.50 + 24% of the amount over $82,500
$157, 501-$200,000 – $32,089.50 + 32% of the amount over $157,500
$200,001-$500,000 – 45,689.50 + 35% of the amount over $200,000
$500,001+ – $150,689.50 + 37% of the amount over $500,000

Joint Return Taxpayers

Income $0-$19,050 – 10% of taxable income
$19,051-$77,400 – $1,905 + 12% of the amount over $19,050
$77,401-$165,000 – $8,907 + 22% of the amount over $77,400
$165,001-$315,000 – $28,179 + 24% of the amount over $165,000
$315,001-$400,000 – $64,179 + 32% of the amount over $315,000
$400,001-$600,000 – $91,379 + 35% of the amount over $400,000
$600,000+ – $161,379 + 37% of the amount over $600,000

Taxes for trusts and estates were also changed to:

$0-$2,550 – 10% of taxable income
$2,551-$9,150 – $255 + 24% of the amount over $2,550
$9,151-$12,500 – $1,839 + 35% of the amount over $9,150
$12,501+ – $3,011.50 + 37% of the amount over $12,500

Tax geeks like me note that the current 10% tax bracket is little changed, and the 15% bracket is now 12%, while the 25% and 28% tax bracket are replaced with 22% and 24% and a new 32% rate. Notice that in the lower brackets, the joint return (mostly for married couples) are double the individual bracket thresholds, eliminating the so-called “marriage penalty.” However in the higher brackets, the 35% rate extends to individuals up to $500,000, but married couples with $600,000 in income fall into that bracket. In the top bracket, the marriage penalty is more significant; individuals fall into it at $500,000, while couples are paying a 37% rate at $600,000 of adjusted gross income. That means more two-income couples will be calculating their taxes filed jointly and separately to arrive at the lowest resulting tax.

Making spirits bright…

Other provisions: the standard deduction is basically doubled, to $12,000 (single) or $24,000 (joint), $18,000 (head of household), and persons who are over 65, blind or disabled can add $1,300 to their standard deduction (currently $1,250).

The bill calls for no personal exemptions for 2018 and beyond (currently $4,050). For married couples with more than two children, this means that the new standard deduction ($24,000 in 2018) will be less than their current total standard deduction plus personal exemptions ($24,850 with three children in 2017). And the Pease limitation, a gradual phaseout of itemized deductions as taxpayers reached higher income brackets, has been eliminated. The Pease limitation added up to 3% to a high income taxpayer’s rates.

Despite the hopes of many taxpayers, the dreaded alternative minimum tax (AMT), remains in the bill. The individual exemption amount is $70,300; for joint filers it’s $109,400. But for the first time, the AMT exemption amounts will be indexed to inflation, so fewer taxpayers will be ensnared by the AMT. Even without this change, fewer taxpayers would be subject to the AMT because, as described below, the maximum deduction for (state and local income, sales, property) taxes is reduced beginning in 2018, and for most taxpayers, it was the deduction of those taxes that made them subject to the AMT.

Interestingly, the new tax bill retains the old capital gains and qualified dividend tax brackets—based on the prior brackets. The 0% capital gains rate will be in place for individuals with $38,600 or less in income ($77,200 for joint filers), and the 15% rate will apply to individuals earning between $38,600 and $452,400 (between $77,400 and $479,000 for joint filers). Above those amounts, capital gains and qualified dividends will be taxed at a 20% rate.

Misfortune seemed his lot…

In addition, the rules governing Roth conversion recharacterizations will be repealed. Under the old law, if a person converted from a traditional IRA to a Roth IRA, and the account lost value over the next year and a half, they could simply undo (recharacterize) the transaction, no harm no foul. Under the new rules, recharactization would no longer be allowed. This makes more accurate tax projections essential going forward, along with a good working crystal ball.

Before the tax act, fewer than 30% of taxpayers itemized their deductions. With the higher standard deductions, many more people will no longer file Schedule A, Itemized Deductions. Their deductions will simply not be enough to exceed the standard deduction, especially given the other changes in the tax bill. This makes year-end planning and projecting even more essential.

For many taxpayers who can itemize deductions, their taxable income number will likely be higher under the new tax plan, because many itemized deductions have been reduced or eliminated. Among them: there will be a $10,000 limit on how much any individual can deduct for state and local income, sales, and property tax payments. Before you rush to write a check to the state or your local government, know that a provision in the bill states that any 2018 state income taxes paid by the end of 2017 are not deductible in 2017, and instead will be treated as having been paid at the end of calendar year 2018. It’s not clear yet what happens if your 2017 state withholding exceeds your state liability. Normally, you would deduct the full amount on your current return and report the excess (refund) as income in the following year. But prior year state income tax refunds are no longer includible in income starting in 2018. Nothing is mentioned about paying and deducting already issued property tax bills due early in 2018, so it makes sense to figure out whether paying them in 2017 or 2018 yields a higher tax benefit. If you are in the AMT for 2017, prepaying any taxes will not yield a benefit.

The mortgage interest deduction will be limited to $750,000 of principal for new mortgages (down from a current $1 million limit); any mortgage interest payments on principal amounts above that limit will not be deductible. However, the charitable contribution deduction limit will rise from 50% of a person’s adjusted gross income to 60% under the new bill. If you think you’ll be ineligible to itemize starting in 2018, it makes sense to evaluate accelerating some planned 2018 charitable contributions to 2017, including any non-cash contributions.

Miscellaneous itemized deductions such as safe deposit box fees, unreimbursed employee business expenses, tax preparation fees, investment expenses and other deductions (currently subject to a reduction by 2% of adjusted gross income) are no longer deductible in any amount beginning in 2018. Here again, it make sense to see if prepaying some of those expenses makes sense (it does not if you’re in the AMT for 2017). Any prepayment amount and timing must be reasonable in the eyes of the IRS.

What about estate taxes? The bill doubles the estate tax exemption from, currently, $5.6 million (projected for 2018) to $11.2 million; $22.4 million for couples. Meanwhile, Congress maintained the step-up in basis, which means that people who inherit low-basis stock or real estate will see the embedded capital gains go away upon receipt, because the assets will have a cost basis equal to their fair market value on the date of death.

Public “C” Corporations saw their highest marginal tax rate drop from 35% to 21%, the largest one-time rate cut in U.S. history for the nation’s largest companies.

And pass-through entities like partnerships, S corporations, limited liability companies and sole proprietorships will receive a 20% deduction on taxes for “qualified business income,” which explicitly does NOT include wages or investment income. This is one of the more complicated areas of the tax bill, and will require working closely with your accountant or CPA to assess whether your pass-through entity will save money converting to a C Corporation.

As things stand today, all of these provisions are due to “sunset” after the year 2025, at which point the entire tax regime will revert to what we have now.

Assuming the tax bill is signed into law this week, and it likely will, you’ll have just over a week to project your 2017 and 2018 taxes, and decide which deductions (or income) you may want to defer to 2018 or accelerate into 2017. Only by projecting both years and finding the least combined liability will you know what planning tactics makes sense for you. We can help.

Oh what fun it is…

If you would like to review your current taxes, investment portfolio or discuss any other financial planning matters, please don’t hesitate to contact us or visit our website at We are a fee-only fiduciary financial planning firm that always puts your interests first. If you are not a client yet, an initial consultation is complimentary and there is never any pressure or hidden sales pitch. We start with a specific assessment of your personal situation. There is no rush and no cookie-cutter approach. Each client is different, and so is your financial plan and investment objectives.


The MoneyGeek thanks guest writer Bob Veres for his contribution to this post

Details of Proposed Tax Reform

The House Ways and Means Committee released draft tax reform legislation on Thursday. Titled “The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act”, H.R. 1, incorporates many of the provisions listed in the Republicans’ September tax reform framework while providing new details. Budget legislation passed in October would allow for the tax reform bill to cut federal government revenue by up to $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years, and still be enacted under the Senate’s budget reconciliation rules, which would require only 51 votes in the Senate for passage. The Joint Committee on Taxation issued an estimate of the revenue effects of the bill on Thursday showing a net total revenue loss of $1.487 trillion over 10 years.

The bill features new tax rates, a lower limit on the deductibility of home mortgage interest, the repeal of most deductions for individuals, and full expensing of depreciable assets by businesses, among its many provisions.

Lawmakers had reportedly been discussing lowering the contribution limits for 401(k) plans, but the bill does not include any changes to those limits.

The Senate Finance Committee is reportedly working on its own version of tax reform legislation, which is expected to be unveiled next week. It is unclear how much that bill will differ from the House bill released on Thursday.

Here are some of the highlights of the House bill:


Tax rates: The bill would impose four tax rates on individuals: 12%, 25%, 35%, and 39.6%, effective for tax years after 2017. The current rates are 10%, 15%, 25%, 28%, 33%, 35%, and 39.6%. The 25% bracket would start at $45,000 of taxable income for single taxpayers and at $90,000 for married taxpayers filing jointly. By comparison, for 2017, the current 25% rate starts at $37,951 of taxable income for single taxpayers and $75,901 for married taxpayers, so more income gets taxed at lower rates under the proposed tax bill.

The 35% bracket would start at $200,000 of taxable income for single taxpayers and at $260,000 for married taxpayers filing jointly. By comparison, for 2017, the current 35% rate starts at $416,701 of taxable income for both single taxpayers and married taxpayers, so more income gets taxed at higher rates at much lower levels under the proposed tax bill. And the 39.6% bracket would apply to taxable income over $500,000 for single taxpayers and $1 million for joint filers (currently $418,400 for single, $470,700 for married taxpayers.)

Standard deduction and personal exemption: The standard deduction would increase from $6,350 to $12,200 for single taxpayers and from $12,700 to $24,400 for married couples filing jointly, effective for tax years after 2017. Single filers with at least one qualifying child would get an $18,300 standard deduction. These amounts will be adjusted for inflation after 2019. However, the personal exemption would be eliminated.

Deductions: Most deductions would be repealed, including the medical expense deduction, the alimony deduction, and the casualty loss deduction (except for personal casualty losses associated with special disaster relief legislation). The deduction for tax preparation fees would also be eliminated (which most taxpayers never qualified to deduct anyway).

However, the deductions for charitable contributions and for mortgage interest would be retained. The mortgage interest deduction on existing mortgages would remain the same; for newly purchased residences (that is, for debt incurred after Nov. 2, 2017), the limit on deductibility would be reduced to $500,000 of acquisition indebtedness from the current $1.1 million. The overall limitation of itemized deductions would also be repealed.

Some rules for charitable contributions would change for tax years beginning after 2017. Among those changes, the current 50% limitation would be increased to 60%.

The deduction for state and local income or sales taxes would be eliminated, except that income or sales taxes paid in carrying out a trade or business or producing income would still be deductible. State and local real property taxes would continue to be deductible, but only up to $10,000. These provisions would be effective for tax years beginning after Dec. 31, 2017.

Credits: Various credits would also be repealed by the bill, including the adoption tax credit, the credit for individuals over age 65 who have retired on disability, the credit associated with mortgage credit certificates, and the credit for plug-in electric vehicles.

The child tax credit would be increased from $1,000 to $1,600, and a $300 credit would be allowed for nonchild dependents. A new “family flexibility” credit of $300 would be allowed for other dependents. The $300 credit for nonchild dependents and the family flexibility credit would expire after 2022.

The bill greatly changes the landscape for claiming college saving and spending deductions and credits. The American opportunity tax credit, the Hope scholarship credit, and the lifetime learning credit would be combined into one credit, providing a 100% tax credit on the first $2,000 of eligible higher education expenses and a 25% credit on the next $2,000, effective for tax years after 2017. Contributions to Coverdell education savings accounts (except rollover contributions) would be prohibited after 2017, but taxpayers would be allowed to roll over money in their Coverdell ESAs into a Sec. 529 plan.

The bill would also repeal the deduction for interest on education loans and the deduction for qualified tuition and related expenses, as well as the exclusion for interest on U.S. savings bonds used to pay qualified higher education expenses, the exclusion for qualified tuition reduction programs, and the exclusion for employer-provided education assistance programs.

Other taxes: The bill would repeal the alternative minimum tax (AMT).

The estate tax would be repealed after 2023 (with the step-up in basis for inherited property retained). In the meantime, the estate tax exclusion amount would double (currently it is $5,490,000, indexed for inflation). The top gift tax rate would be lowered to 35%.

Passthrough income: A portion of net income distributions from passthrough entities (partnerships and S corporations) would be taxed at a maximum rate of 25%, instead of at ordinary individual income tax rates, effective for tax years after 2017. The bill includes provisions to prevent individuals from converting wage income into passthrough distributions. Passive activity income would always be eligible for the 25% rate.

For income from nonpassive business activities (including wages), owners and shareholders generally could elect to treat 30% of the income as eligible for the 25% rate; the other 70% would be taxed at ordinary income rates. Alternatively, owners and shareholders could apply a facts-and-circumstances formula.

However, for specified service activities, the applicable percentage that would be eligible for the 25% rate would be zero. These activities are those defined in Sec. 1202(e)(3)(A) (any trade or business involving the performance of services in the fields of health, law, engineering, architecture, accounting, actuarial science, performing arts, consulting, athletics, financial services, brokerage services, or any trade or business where the principal asset of such trade or business is the reputation or skill of one or more of its employees), including investing, trading, or dealing in securities, partnership interests, or commodities. Essentially, any passthrough entity that’s considered a personal service corporation under current law would be excluded from this 25% maximum tax rate provision.

Business provisions

A flat corporate rate: The bill would replace the current four-tier schedule of corporate rates (15%, 25%, 34%, and 35%, with a $75,001 threshold for the 34% rate) with a flat 20% rate (25% for personal services corporations). Remember, shareholders of non-passthrough entities (better known as C corporations), get their income taxed twice-once at the corporate level when earned, and once again when distributed to shareholders. The corporate AMT is repealed along with the individual AMT.

Higher expensing levels: The bill would provide 100% expensing of qualified property acquired and placed in service after Sept. 27, 2017, and before Jan. 1, 2023 (with an additional year for longer-production-period property). It would also increase tenfold the Sec. 179 expensing limitation ceiling and phaseout threshold to $5 million and $20 million, respectively, both indexed for inflation. Essentially, most small businesses would be able to expense all qualified property and not have to depreciate them over their useful lives.

Cash accounting method more widely available: The bill would increase to $25 million the current $5 million average gross receipts ceiling for corporations generally permitted to use the cash method of accounting and extend it to businesses with inventories. Such businesses also would be exempted from the complicated and arcane uniform capitalization (UNICAP) rules. The exemption from the percentage-of-completion method (forcing you to recognize income as you progress towards completion of a project rather than at the end) for long-term contracts of $10 million in average gross receipts would also be increased to $25 million.

NOLs, other deductions eliminated or limited: Deductions of net operating losses (NOLs) would be limited to 90% of taxable income. NOLs would have an indefinite carryforward period, but carrybacks would no longer be available for most businesses. Carryforwards for losses arising after 2017 would be increased by an interest factor. Other deductions also would be curtailed or eliminated:

  • Instead of the current provisions under Sec. 163(j) limiting a deduction for business interest paid to a related party or basing a limitation on the taxpayer’s debt-equity ratio or a percentage of adjusted taxable income, the bill would impose a limit of 30% of adjusted taxable income for all businesses with more than $25 million in average gross receipts.
  • The Sec. 199 domestic production activities deduction would be repealed.
  • Deductions for entertainment, amusement, or recreation activities as a business expense would be generally eliminated, as would employee fringe benefits for transportation and certain other perks deemed personal in nature rather than directly related to a trade or business, except to the extent that such benefits are treated as taxable compensation to an employee (or includible in gross income of a recipient who is not an employee).

Like-kind exchanges limited to real estate: The bill would limit like-kind exchange treatment to real estate, but a transition rule would allow completion of currently pending Sec. 1031 exchanges of personal property.

Business and energy credits curtailed: Offsetting some of the revenue loss resulting from the lower top corporate tax rate, the bill would repeal a number of business credits, including:

  • The work opportunity tax credit (Sec. 51).
  • The credit for employer-provided child care (Sec. 45F).
  • The credit for rehabilitation of qualified buildings or certified historic structures (Sec. 47).
  • The Sec. 45D new markets tax credit. Credits allocated before 2018 could still be used in up to seven subsequent years.
  • The credit for providing access to disabled individuals (Sec. 44).
  • The credit for enhanced oil recovery (Sec. 43).
  • The credit for producing oil and gas from marginal wells (Sec. 45I)

Other credits would be modified, including those for a portion of employer Social Security taxes paid with respect to employee tips (Sec. 45B), for electricity produced from certain renewable resources (Sec. 45), for production from advanced nuclear power facilities (Sec. 45J), and the investment tax credit (Sec. 46) for eligible energy property. The Sec. 25D residential energy-efficient property credit, which expired for property placed in service after 2016, would be extended retroactively through 2022 but reduced beginning in 2020.

Bond provisions: Several types of tax-exempt bonds would become taxable:

  • Private activity bonds would no longer be tax-exempt. The bill would include in taxpayer income interest on such bonds issued after 2017.
  • Interest on bonds issued to finance construction of, or capital expenditures for, a professional sports stadium would be taxable.
  • Interest on advance refunding bonds would be taxable.
  • Current provisions relating to tax credit bonds would generally be repealed. Holders and issuers would continue receiving tax credits and payments for tax credit bonds already issued, but no new bonds could be issued.

Insurance provisions: The bill would introduce several revenue-raising provisions modifying special rules applicable to the insurance industry. These include bringing life insurers’ NOL carryover rules into conformity with those of other businesses.

Compensation provisions: The bill would impose new limits on the deductibility of certain highly paid employees’ pay, including, for the first time, those of tax-exempt organizations.

  • Nonqualified deferred compensation would be subject to tax in the tax year in which it is no longer subject to a substantial risk of forfeiture. Current law would apply to existing nonqualified deferred compensation arrangements until the last tax year beginning before 2026.
  • The exceptions for commissions and performance-based compensation from the Sec. 162(m) $1 million limitation on deductibility of compensation of certain top employees of publicly traded corporations would be repealed. The bill would also include more employees in the definition of “covered employee” subject to the limit.
  • The bill would impose similar rules on executives of organizations exempt from tax under Sec. 501(a), with a 20% excise tax on compensation exceeding $1 million paid to any of a tax-exempt organization’s five highest-paid employees, including “excess parachute payments.”

Foreign income and persons

Deduction for foreign-source dividends received by 10% U.S. corporate owners: The bill would add a new section to the Code, Sec. 245A, which replaces the foreign tax credit for dividends received by a U.S. corporation with a dividend-exemption system. This provision would be effective for distributions made after 2017. This provision is designed to eliminate the “lock-out” effect that encourages U.S. companies not to bring earnings back to the United States.

The bill would also repeal Sec. 902, the indirect foreign tax credit provision, and amend Sec. 960 to coordinate with the bill’s dividends-received provision. Thus, no foreign tax credit or deduction would be allowed for any taxes (including withholding taxes) paid or accrued with respect to any dividend to which the dividend exemption of the bill would apply.

Elimination of U.S. tax on reinvestments in U.S. property: Under current law, a foreign subsidiary’s undistributed earnings that are reinvested in U.S. property are subject to current U.S. tax. The bill would amend Sec. 956(a) to eliminate this tax on reinvestments in the United States for tax years of foreign corporations beginning after Dec. 31, 2017. This provision would remove the disincentive from reinvesting foreign earnings in the United States.

Limitation on loss deductions for 10%-owned foreign corporations: In a companion provision to the deduction for foreign-source dividends, the bill would amend Sec. 961 and add new Sec. 91 to require a U.S. parent to reduce the basis of its stock in a foreign subsidiary by the amount of any exempt dividends received by the U.S. parent from its foreign subsidiary, but only for determining loss, not gain. The provision also requires a U.S. corporation that transfers substantially all of the assets of a foreign branch to a foreign subsidiary to include in the U.S. corporation’s income the amount of any post-2017 losses that were incurred by the branch. The provisions would be effective for distributions or transfers made after 2017.

Repatriation provision: The bill would amend Sec. 956 to provide that U.S. shareholders owning at least 10% of a foreign subsidiary will include in income for the subsidiary’s last tax year beginning before 2018 the shareholder’s pro rata share of the net post-1986 historical earnings and profits (E&P) of the foreign subsidiary to the extent that E&P have not been previously subject to U.S. tax, determined as of Nov. 2, 2017, or Dec. 31, 2017 (whichever is higher). The portion of E&P attributable to cash or cash equivalents would be taxed at a 12% rate; the remainder would be taxed at a 5% rate. U.S. shareholders can elect to pay the tax liability over eight years in equal annual installments of 12.5% of the total tax due.

Income from production activities sourced: The bill would amend Sec. 863(b) to provide that income from the sale of inventory property produced within and sold outside the United States (or vice versa) is allocated solely on the basis of the production activities for the inventory.

Changes to Subpart F rules: The bill would repeal the foreign shipping income and foreign base company oil-related income rules. It would also add an inflation adjustment to the de minimis exception to the foreign base company income rules and make permanent the lookthrough rule, under which passive income one foreign subsidiary receives from a related foreign subsidiary generally is not includible in the taxable income of the U.S. parent, provided that income was not subject to current U.S. tax or effectively connected with a U.S. trade or business.

Under the bill, a U.S. corporation would be treated as constructively owning stock held by its foreign shareholder for purposes of determining CFC status. The bill would also eliminate the requirements that a U.S. parent corporation must control a foreign subsidiary for 30 days before Subpart F inclusions apply.

Base erosion provisions: Under the bill, a U.S. parent of one or more foreign subsidiaries would be subject to current U.S. tax on 50% of the U.S. parent’s foreign high returns—the excess of the U.S. parent’s foreign subsidiaries’ aggregate net income over a routine return (7% plus the federal short-term rate) on the foreign subsidiaries’ aggregate adjusted bases in depreciable tangible property, adjusted downward for interest expense.

The deductible net interest expense of a U.S. corporation that is a member of an international financial reporting group would be limited to the extent the U.S. corporation’s share of the group’s global net interest expense exceeds 110% of the U.S. corporation’s share of the group’s global earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA).

Payments (other than interest) made by a U.S. corporation to a related foreign corporation that are deductible, includible in costs of goods sold, or includible in the basis of a depreciable or amortizable asset would be subject to a 20% excise tax, unless the related foreign corporation elected to treat the payments as income effectively connected with the conduct of a U.S. trade or business. Consequently, the foreign corporation’s net profits (or gross receipts if no election is made) with respect to those payments would be subject to full U.S. tax, eliminating the potential U.S. tax benefit otherwise achieved.

Exempt organizations

Clarification that state and local entities are subject to unrelated business income tax (UBIT): The bill would amend Sec. 511 to clarify that all state and local entities including pension plans are subject to the Sec. 511 tax on unrelated business income (UBI).

Exclusion from UBIT for research income: The act would amend the Code to provide that income from research is exempt from UBI only if the results are freely made available to the public.

Reduction in excise tax paid by private foundations: The bill would repeal the current rules that apply either a 1% or 2% tax on private foundations’ net investment income with a 1.4% rate for tax years beginning after 2017.

Modification of the Johnson Amendment: Effective on the date of enactment, the bill would amend Sec. 501 to permit statements about political campaigns to be made by religious organizations.

If you would like to review your current investment portfolio or discuss any other financial planning matters, please don’t hesitate to contact us or visit our website at We are a fee-only fiduciary financial planning firm that always puts your interests first. If you are not a client yet, an initial consultation is complimentary and there is never any pressure or hidden sales pitch. We start with a specific assessment of your personal situation. There is no rush and no cookie-cutter approach. Each client is different, and so is your financial plan and investment objectives.

Source: AICPA

Tax Reform or Accountant’s Re-employment Act?

For as long as I can remember, tax reduction and simplification have been on the table for congress and past presidents. So why not President Trump? File your next tax return on a postcard (not likely)? I might be a bit cynical, but the only result of the next tax act I see will be extending my employment as a tax planner and preparer for the foreseeable future.

I sincerely doubt I’ll see significant tax simplification in my lifetime, so my fellow CPA’s and Turbotax employees can probably breathe a sigh of relief-their jobs are likely safe for years to come.

You can be forgiven if you’re skeptical that Congress will be able to completely overhaul our tax system after multiple failures to overhaul our health care system, but professional advisors are studying the newly-released nine-page proposal closely nonetheless. We only have the bare outlines of what the initial plan might look like before it goes through the Congressional sausage grinder:

First, we would see the current seven tax brackets for individuals reduced to three — a 12% rate for lower-income people (up from 10% currently), 25% in the middle and a top bracket of 35%. The proposal doesn’t include the income “cutoffs” for the three brackets, but if they end up as suggested in President Trump’s tax plan from the campaign, the 25% rate would start at $75,000 (for married couples–currently $75,900), and joint filers would start paying 35% at $225,000 of income (currently $416,700).

The dreaded alternative minimum tax, which was created to ensure that upper-income Americans would not be able to finesse away their tax obligations altogether, would be eliminated under the proposal. But there is a mysterious notation that Congress might impose an additional rate for the highest-income taxpayers, to ensure that wealthier Americans don’t contribute a lower share than they pay today.

The initial proposal would nearly double the standard deduction to $12,000 for individuals and $24,000 for married couples, and increase the child tax credit, now set at $1,000 per child under age 17. (No actual figure was given.)

At the same time, the new tax plan promises to eliminate many itemized deductions, without telling us which ones other than a promise to keep deductions for home mortgage interest and charitable contributions. The plan mentions tax benefits that would encourage work, higher education and retirement savings, but gives no details of what might change in these areas.

The most interesting part of the proposal is a full repeal of the estate tax and generation-skipping estate tax, which affects only a small percentage of the population but results in an enormous amount of planning and calculations for those who ARE affected. Anyone with enough money to be subject to the estate tax, has probably paid lawyers and accountants enough for planning to avoid paying a single dollar of it.

The plan would also limit the maximum tax rate for pass-through business entities like partnerships and limited liability companies (LLC’s) to 25%, which might allow high-income business owners to take their gains through the entity, rather than as personal (1040) income and avoid the highest personal tax brackets.

Finally, the tax plan would lower America’s maximum corporate (C-Corporation) tax rate from the current 35% to 20%. To encourage companies to repatriate profits held overseas, the proposal would introduce a 100% exemption for dividends from foreign subsidiaries in which the U.S. parent owns at least a 10% stake, and imposes a one-time “low” (not specified) tax rate on wealth already accumulated overseas.

What are the implications of this bare-bones proposal? The most obvious, and most remarked-upon, is the drop that many high-income taxpayers would experience, from the current 39.6% top tax rate to 35%. That, plus the elimination of the estate tax, in addition to the lowering of the corporate tax (potentially leading to higher dividends) has been described as a huge relief for upper-income American investors, which could fuel the notion that the entire exercise is a big giveaway to large donors. But the mysterious “surcharge” on wealthier taxpayers might taketh away what the rest of the plan giveth.

But many Americans with S corporations, LLCs or partnership entities (known as pass-through entities because their income is reported on the owners’ personal returns and therefore no company level tax is paid) would potentially receive a much greater windfall, if they could choose to pay taxes on their corporate earnings at 25% rather than nearly 40% currently. (No big surprise: The Trump organization is a pass-through entity.)

A huge unknown is which itemized deductions would be eliminated in return for the higher standard deduction. Would the plan eliminate the deduction for state and local property and income taxes, which is especially valuable to people in high-tax states such as New York, New Jersey and California, and in general to higher-income taxpayers who pay state taxes at the highest rate? Note that on average, only about 35% of Americans itemize their deductions on Schedule A, most of them higher income taxpayers.

Currently, about one-third of the 145 million households filing a tax return — or roughly 48 million filers — claim state and local tax deductions. Among households with income of $100,000 or more, the average deduction for state and local taxes is around $12,300. Some economists have speculated that people earning between $100,000 and around $300,000 might wind up paying more in taxes under the proposal than they do now. Taxpayers with incomes above $730,000 would hypothetically see their after-tax income increase an average of 8.5 percent.

Big picture, economists are in the early stages of debating how much the plan might add to America’s soaring $20 trillion national debt. One back-of-the-envelope estimate by a Washington budget watchdog estimated that the tax cuts might add $5.8 trillion to the debt load over the next 10 years. According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget analysis, Republican economists have identified about $3.6 trillion in offsetting revenues (mostly an assumption of increased economic growth), so by the most conservative calculation the tax plan would cost the federal deficit somewhere in the $2.2 trillion range over the next decade.

Others, notably the Brookings Tax Policy Center (see graph) see the new proposals actually raising tax revenues for individuals (blue bars), while mostly reducing the flow to Uncle Sam from corporations.

CA - 2017-9-30 - Tax Reform Proposal_2

These cost estimates have huge political implications for whether a tax bill will ever be passed. Under a prior agreement, the Senate can pass tax cuts with a simple majority of 51 votes — avoiding a filibuster that might sink the effort — only if the bill adds no more than $1.5 trillion to the national debt during the next decade.

That means compromise. To get the impact on the national debt below $1.5 trillion, Congressional Republicans might decide on a smaller cut to the corporate rate, to something closer to 25-28%, while giving typical families a smaller 1-percentage point tax cut (gee…thanks?). Under that scenario, multi-national corporations might be able to bring back $1 trillion or more in profit at unusually low tax rates, and most families might see a modest tax cut that will put a few hundred extra bucks in their pockets.

Alternatively, Congress could pass tax cuts of more than $1.5 trillion if the Republicans could flip enough Democratic Senators to get to 60 votes. The Democrats would almost certainly demand large tax cuts for lower and middle earners, potentially lower taxes on corporations and higher taxes on the wealthy. Would you bet on that sort of compromise?

We shall see, and I’ll keep you posted on tax developments. For now, put away that post card–you’re probably going to need an envelope and more postage.

If you would like to review your current investment portfolio or discuss any other financial planning matters, please don’t hesitate to contact us or visit our website at We are a fee-only fiduciary financial planning firm that always puts your interests first. If you are not a client yet, an initial consultation is complimentary and there is never any pressure or hidden sales pitch. We start with a specific assessment of your personal situation. There is no rush and no cookie-cutter approach. Each client is different, and so is your financial plan and investment objectives.

The MoneyGeek thanks guest writer Bob Veres for his contribution to this post


Roth IRA Conversions after Age 70-1/2

A Roth IRA conversion allows you to move a sum of money from a traditional/rollover IRA into a Roth IRA, pay the taxes due, and thereby convert the future distributions into a tax-free stream out of the Roth IRA for yourself or your heirs.  You probably already know that the IRS requires you to start taking mandatory distributions from your traditional IRA when you turn 70 1/2, even if you don’t actually need the money.  A Roth IRA has no such annual minimum distribution requirement for the original owner and spouse. So the question is: can you do a Roth conversion at that late date, and thereby defer distributions forever?

The answer is that you CAN do a Roth conversion at any time, including after age 70 1/2.  But that might not be ideal tax planning.  Why?  Because at the time of the conversion, you would have to pay ordinary income taxes on the amount converted—basically, paying Uncle Sam up-front for what you would owe on all future distributions.  So, from a tax standpoint, you’re either paying taxes on yearly distributions or all at once.  (Or, if it’s a partial conversion, on the amount transferred over.)  If the goal was to avoid having to pay taxes on that money until you needed it, the conversion kind of defeats the purpose. Unless, of course, you have little other taxable income, and adding a Roth Conversion amount costs you little or nothing in taxes

The traditional reason people made Roth conversions was to pay taxes at a lower rate today than the rate they expect to have to pay on distributions in the future.  They might also want to convert in order to leave the Roth IRA dollars to heirs who might be in a higher tax bracket (keep in mind that a heir who is not your spouse is required to take a minimum, albeit non-taxable, distribution from a Roth IRA).  But with the new Republican Administration taking over, and Republicans controlling both houses of Congress, tax rates are odds-on favorites to go down, not up, in the near future.

If you still want to go ahead and make a conversion after the mandatory distribution date, the law says that you have to take your mandatory withdrawal from your IRA before you do your conversion. That means that you can’t make a 100% conversion of your traditional IRA if you are subject to minimum distribution requirements.  Regardless, you or your tax advisor should “run the numbers” to ensure that you understand the taxes and tax rates that apply before and after the Roth Conversion.

If you would like to review your current investment portfolio or discuss any other tax or financial planning matters, please don’t hesitate to contact us or visit our website at We are a fee-only fiduciary financial planning firm that always puts your interests first.  If you are not a client yet, an initial consultation is complimentary and there is never any pressure or hidden sales pitch. We start with a specific assessment of your personal situation. There is no rush and no cookie-cutter approach. Each client is different, and so is your financial plan and investment objectives.


The MoneyGeek thanks guest writer Bob Veres for his contribution to this post

An Estate Plan for your Digital Assets

In recent years, a new category of assets has appeared on the scene, which can be more complicated to pass on at someone’s death than stocks, bonds and cash.  The list includes such valuable property as digital domain names, social media accounts, websites and blogs that you manage, and pretty much anything stored in the digital “cloud.”  In addition, if you were to die tomorrow, would your heirs know the pass-codes to access your iPad or smartphone?  Or, for that matter, your e-mail account or the or iTunes shopping accounts you’ve set up?  Would they know how to shut down your Facebook account, or would it live on after your death?

A service called Everplans has created a listing of these and other digital assets that you might consider in your estate plan, and recommends that you share your logins and passwords with a digital executor or heirs.  If the account or asset has value (airline miles or hotel rewards programs, domain names) these should be transferred to specific heirs—and you can include these bequests in your will.  Other assets should probably be shut down or discontinued, which means your digital executor should probably be a detail-oriented person with some technical familiarity.

The site also provides a guide to how to shut down accounts; click on “F,” select “Facebook,” and you’re taken to a site ( which tells you how to deactivate or delete the account.  Note that each option requires the digital executor to be able to log into the site first; otherwise that person would have to submit your birth and death certificates and proof of authority under local law that he/she is your lawful representative.  (The executor can also “memorialize” your account, which means freezing it from outside participation.)

The point here is that even if you know who would get your house and retirement assets if you were hit by a bus tomorrow, you could still be leaving a mess to your heirs unless you clean up your digital assets as well.

If you would like to review your current investment portfolio or discuss any other financial planning matters, please don’t hesitate to contact us or visit our website at We are a fee-only fiduciary financial planning firm that always puts your interests first.  If you are not a client yet, an initial consultation is complimentary and there is never any pressure or hidden sales pitch.


The MoneyGeek thanks guest writer Bob Veres for his contribution to this post

New Benefits for 529 Plans

On December 18, 2015, Congress approved the “Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes (PATH) Act of 2015”, which includes provisions that impact 529 plans. President Barack Obama signed the bill into law the same day.


Previously, 529 rules treated computers as a Qualified Higher Education Expense only if the beneficiary’s college required them as a condition of enrollment or attendance. Under the new law, computer equipment and related hardware qualify even if they are not specifically required by the university, college, or technical school the beneficiary attends, although they must be used primarily by the beneficiary while enrolled in school. The new law defines desktop computers, laptops, and other related technology as a Qualified Higher Education Expense. The costs for Internet access and computer software related to a beneficiary’s studies also qualify.

The new law is retroactive to expenses incurred since January 1, 2015. So if your beneficiary purchased a computer or related technology any time in 2015 to use while in college, funds from a 529 account can be used to cover the cost if the withdrawal was made by Thursday, December 31.

Refund Re-contribution

The PATH Act also gives 529 account owners a 60-day window to re-contribute refunds from Eligible Educational Institutions into their accounts. The law is retroactive for withdrawals made during 2015.

Under the new law, account owners have 60 days from the date of the refund to redeposit a refund of Qualified Higher Education Expenses into the same 529 account from which the money was withdrawn. For example, if a beneficiary receives a refund from an Eligible Educational Institution because he or she withdrew from school due to an illness or other unforeseen circumstance, the refund may be returned to the beneficiary’s 529 account and would not be deemed a non-qualified withdrawal or be subject to any taxes or tax penalties.

The re-contribution cannot exceed the amount of the refund.

The law is retroactive to January 1, 2015.

  • Account owners who received a refund of Qualified Higher Education Expenses between January 1, 2015, and December 18, 2015, the date the law was enacted, have until February 16, 2016 — 60 days from the enactment date for the PATH Act of 2015 — to redeposit the money.
  • Account owners who receive a refund of Qualified Higher Education Expenses on any date after December 18, 2015, have 60 days from the date of the refund to redeposit the money.

It is recommended that account owners keep a receipt of refunds in order to have documentation of the amount of the refund and the date it was issued.

If you would like to review your current investment portfolio or discuss any other financial planning matters, please don’t hesitate to contact us or visit our website at We are a fee-only fiduciary financial planning firm that always puts your interests first.  If you are not a client yet, an initial consultation is complimentary and there is never any pressure or hidden sales pitch.