Tag Archives: Employment Taxes

UPDATE ON DOL OVERTIME RULES

Dear Clients,

 

There has been an important update on the new DOL Overtime Rules that were set to go into effect on December 1st. Yesterday a U.S. District Judge issued an injunction against the new rules. This means that the new overtime rules will not go into effect on December 1st. The injunction stops implementation or enforcement of the new  rules until further action is taken by the Department of Labor, most likely through appealing the ruling. At this point it is uncertain when, if ever, the new rules will go into effect.

 

We will keep you apprised of any new developments. Please check our website as well for any updates. Contact us if you have any questions about how this will affect your business.

 

Thank you,

Gidget and Adam

 

 

 

 

Schutte & Hilgendorf is a leading Prescott CPA firm, offering superior client service to individuals, small businesses, non-profit organizations, and homeowners associations.

Our services include accounting, bookkeeping, audit, review, tax return preparation, tax planning, payroll and QuickBooks consulting. We are located in Prescott and serve all of Yavapai County, and Northern Arizona.


DOL Final Overtime Rules Presentation

There has been an important update on the new DOL Overtime Rules that were set to go into effect on December 1st. Yesterday a U.S. District Judge issued an injunction against the new rules. This means that the new overtime rules will not go into effect on December 1st. The injunction stops implementation or enforcement of the new  rules until further action is taken by the Department of Labor, most likely through appealing the ruling. At this point it is uncertain when, if ever, the new rules will go into effect.

We will keep you apprised of any new developments. Please check our website as well for any updates. Contact us if you have any questions about how this will affect your business.

Thank you for attending the seminar on the new DOL Final Overtime Rules.  We’ve attached (in blue below) our presentation to the website for you and those that were not able to attend.

Below in green is a link to the Department of Labor’s fact sheets. These can be very helpful if you have questions about a particular industry or type of employee.

 

https://www.dol.gov/whd/fact-sheets-index.htm

 

DOL Final Overtime Rules Presentation

 

If you have additional questions about this post or any other, please contact us directly at 928-778-0079.

Schutte & Hilgendorf is a leading Prescott CPA firm, offering superior client service to individuals, small businesses, non-profit organizations, and homeowners associations.

Our services include accounting, bookkeeping, audit, review, tax return preparation, tax planning, payroll and QuickBooks consulting. We are located in Prescott and serve all of Yavapai County, and Northern Arizona.


Latest News from IRS Regarding Homeowner Associations

The IRS recently posted this information regarding the tax-exempt status of Homeowners’ Associations.  There is often confusion between Non-Profit Status in the eyes of the Arizona Corporation Commission and in the eyes of the IRS.  Most homeowners associations will not be granted tax-exemption by the IRS, and are expected to file an 1120 or 1120H.  Click on the link below for more information:

TAX EXEMPT STATUS OF HOMEOWNERS’ ASSOCIATIONS

 

Schutte & Hilgendorf CPAs has over 20 years experience invested in the complex accounting and tax treatment of Homeowners’ Associations. We provide audit, review and compilations to homeowners association to help them meet the annual Arizona statutory requirement.  In addition, we provide tax planning and preparation services to Associations all year around.  Call us today to schedule your free initial consultation 928-778-0079.


Questions and Answers for the Additional Medicare Tax – Effective January 1, 2013

The following link will take you to questions and answers that will  provide employers and payroll service providers information that will help them as they prepare to implement the Additional Medicare Tax which goes into effect in 2013. The Additional Medicare Tax applies to individuals’ wages, other compensation, and self-employment income over certain thresholds; employers are responsible for withholding the tax on wages and other compensation in certain circumstances. The IRS has prepared these questions and answers to assist employers and payroll service providers in adapting systems and processes that may be impacted.

Click on the link below to be taken to the IRS Q&A:

Questions and Answers for the Additional Medicare Tax – From the IRS

For further tax planning considerations and questions, contact Schutte & Hilgendorf, pllc – CPAs.  We offer free initial consultations.  Schutte & Hilgendorf, pllc – CPA’s, is a full service public accounting firm providing tax planning, preparation, audit, accounting, and QuickBooks consulting to individuals, small businesses, non-profits, and homeowners associations in the Prescott and greater Yavapai County area.  Call us at 928-778-0079 or visit www.prescottaccountants.com


IRS/DOL Crackdown on Independent Contractor vs. Employee

IRS/DOL Crackdown

If you classify any workers as “independent contractors”—or have plans to do so—2013 is the year to make sure you get that classification correct.

Below is Topic 762 – Independent Contractor vs. Employee provided by irs.gov to help in identifying which classification a worker falls:

To determine whether a worker is an independent contractor or an employee under common law, you must examine the relationship between the worker and the business. All evidence of control and independence in this relationship should be considered. The facts that provide this evidence fall into three categories – Behavioral Control, Financial Control, and the Type of Relationship.

Behavioral Control covers facts that show whether the business has a right to direct or control how the work is done, through instructions, training, or other means.

Financial Control covers facts that show whether the business has a right to direct or control the financial and business aspects of the worker’s job. This includes:

  • The extent to which the worker has unreimbursed business expenses
  • The extent of the worker’s investment in the facilities used in performing services
  • The extent to which the worker makes his or her services available to the relevant market
  • How the business pays the worker, and
  • The extent to which the worker can realize a profit or incur a loss

Type of Relationship covers facts that show how the parties perceive their relationship. This includes:

  • Written contracts describing the relationship the parties intended to create
  • The extent to which the worker is available to perform services for other, similar businesses
  • Whether the business provides the worker with employee-type benefits, such as insurance, a pension plan, vacation pay, or sick pay
  • The permanency of the relationship, and
  • The extent to which services performed by the worker are a key aspect of the regular business of the company

For more information, refer to Publication 15-A (PDF), Employer’s Supplemental Tax Guide, or Publication 1779 (PDF), Independent Contractor or Employee. If you want the IRS to determine whether a specific individual is an independent contractor or an employee, file Form SS-8 (PDF), Determination of Worker Status for Purposes of Federal Employment Taxes and Income Tax Withholding.

Contact Schutte & Hilgendorf with your questions related to independent contractor vs. employee.  Schutte & Hilgendorf, CPAs, is a full service public accounting firm providing tax planning, preparation, audit, accounting, and QuickBooks consulting to individuals and small business in the Prescott and greater Yavapai County area.  Call us at 928-778-0079 or visit www.prescottaccountants.com


Knowing when to make your Arizona Withholding Payment

How does an employer know whether to make Arizona withholding payments on a quarterly basis or more frequently?

QUARTERLY BASIS PAYMENTS: An employer must make its Arizona withholding payments on a quarterly basis if the average amount of Arizona income taxes withheld during the preceding four calendar quarters does not exceed $1,500.

MORE FREQUENT PAYMENTS: An employer must make its Arizona withholding tax payments at the same time as its federal withholding deposits if the average amount of Arizona income taxes withheld during the preceding four calendar quarters exceeds $1,500.

WHY DOES THE EMPLOYER MAKE THIS COMPUTATION? Arizona law requires an employer, at the beginning of each new quarter, to compute its average Arizona withholding tax liability for the preceding four calendar quarters. This calculation is performed to determine the correct Arizona withholding payment schedule.

HOW DOES THE EMPLOYER MAKE THIS COMPUTATION? An employer that has four full consecutive calendar quarters of Arizona withholding liability historical data must use the regular withholding payment schedule computation. An employer that does not have four full consecutive calendar quarters of Arizona withholding liability historical data must use the alternate withholding payment schedule computation. Refer to the “Arizona Withholding Liability/Payment Schedule” section of the Form A1QRT instructions for further information

Per the State of Arizona – Department of Revenue – Arizona Withholding FAQ’s

Should you have questions regarding this post or any other tax needs, contact us at Schutte & Hilgendorf, PLLC, Prescott accountants serving the greater Yavapai County with tax, accounting, auditing, and QuickBooks consulting expertise.


IRS may recharacterize dividend payments to S shareholder-employee as wages

IRS may recharacterize dividend payments to S shareholder-employee as wages
Watson, P.C. v. U.S., (DC IA 12/23/10) 107 AFTR 2d ¶2011-305
A district court has concluded that an S corporation shareholder-employee’s $24,000 salary in 2002 and 2003 was unreasonably low, and allowed IRS to reclassify as salary over $67,000 in dividend payments to the officer during each of those years. The corporation will also owe employment taxes on the reclassified dividend payments.
RIA observation: This is a long standing compliance issue with IRS, which feels that many service professionals try to minimize Medicare and Social Security taxes by routing what would otherwise be self-employment income through an S corporation and then paying themselves a nominal salary. Since the amount of compensation that an S corporation pays its employee-shareholder is within the employee-shareholder’s discretion, he may have an incentive to claim less than a reasonable salary and take from the S corporation other payments (e.g., dividends) that aren’t subject to employment taxes.
RIA observation: In 2010, the House but not the Senate passed legislation that included a crackdown on service professionals who try to minimize Medicare and Social Security taxes by routing their self-employment income through an S corporation and then paying themselves a nominal salary (see Federal Taxes Weekly Alert 06/03/2010).
Facts. David E. Watson had a bachelor’s degree in business administration and a specialization in accounting. He owned a professional corporation (PC) called DEWPC that, since its inception, had elected to be taxed as an S corporation. Watson was its sole shareholder, employee, director, and officer, and was the only person to whom DEWPC distributed money during the years at issue. His $24,000 annual salary was documented in the corporate minutes. In selecting his salary, he did not look at what comparable businesses paid for similar services. For both years at issue, Watson received dividend distributions from DEWPC that totaled over $175,000 annually.
On Feb. 5, 2007, IRS assessed $48,519 in taxes, penalties, and interest against DEWPC for the eight calendar quarters of 2002 and 2003. It made these assessments after it determined that portions of the dividend distributions from DEWPC to Watson should have been characterized as wages paid to Watson that were subject to employment taxes. DEWPC later paid $4,063.93 toward these assessments and then filed a claim for refund of the payments. IRS denied the claim and DEWPC sued in district court.
Background. Employers are liable for FICA (Social Security) taxes on wages paid to their employees. (Code Sec. 3111) Fact Sheet 2008-25, August 2008 warns S corporations not to attempt to avoid paying employment taxes by having their officers treat their compensation as cash distributions, payments of personal expenses, and/or loans rather than as wages. Fact Sheet 2008-25, August 2008 lists these factors that courts have considered in determining reasonable compensation:
•       training and experience;
•       duties and responsibilities;
•       time and effort devoted to the business;
•       dividend history;
•       payments to non-shareholder employees;
•       timing and manner of paying bonuses to key people;
•       what comparable businesses pay for similar services;
•       compensation agreements; and
•       use of a formula to determine compensation.
DEWPC argued that IRS did not have the authority to recharacterize any of the dividend payments as compensation. DEWPC cited three federal court cases to support its argument.
Court’s ruling. The district court found that DEWPC’s position was undermined by IRS revenue rulings and case law. For example, in Rev Rul 74-44, 1974-1 CB 287, IRS concluded that dividends received by an S corporation’s two sole shareholders were wages for which the corporation was liable for FICA, FUTA and income tax withholding. In Joseph Radtke v. U.S., (DC WI 4/11/89) 63 AFTR 2d 89-1469, aff’d, (CA 7 2/23/90) 65 AFTR 2d 90-1155, a district court determined that certain funds designated as dividends were actually compensation for which an S corporation owed employment taxes. The district court was not persuaded by the rulings that DEWPC cited because in those rulings, the taxpayer was attempting to recharacterize funds, whereas in DEPW’s case, it was the government that was attempting to recharacterize the funds.
The district court said that the proper tax treatment of funds disbursed by an S corporation to its employees or shareholders turns on an analysis of whether the payments were remuneration for services performed. After reviewing the facts, the court concluded that DEWPC structured Watson’s salary and dividend payments in an effort to avoid federal employment taxes, with full knowledge that the dividends paid to Watson were actually “remuneration for services performed.” The court believed that a reasonable person in Watson’s role as DEWPC’s sole shareholder, officer, and employee would be expected to earn far more than a $24,000 salary for his services. The court pointed out that Watson was an exceedingly qualified accountant, with both bachelor’s and advanced degrees, working as one of the primary earners in a reputable firm that had over $2 million in gross revenues in 2002 and nearly $3 million in 2003.
As a result of the ruling, DEWPC will owe employment taxes, penalties, and interest on the 2002 and 2003 dividend distributions to Watson that were reclassified as salary.
RIA Research References: For S corporation dividends as wages subject to withholding, see FTC 2d/FIN ¶ H-4329; TaxDesk ¶ 532,002.
Source:  Federal Tax Updates on Checkpoint Newsstand tab 1/13/2011

Should you have questions regarding this post or any other tax needs, contact us at Schutte & Hilgendorf, PLLC, Prescott accountants serving the greater Yavapai County with tax, accounting, auditing, and QuickBooks consulting expertise.