SBA Announces Most PPP Loans of Less than $2 Million Will Not Have Good Faith Certication Questioned
In an FAQ[1] updated on May 13, 2020, the SBA appears to have mostly backed off the threat to review PPP loans of less than $2 million for improperly certifying their loan was necessary.
On April 29, 2020, Treasury Secretary Mnunchin and SBA Administrator Jovita Carranza issued a Joint Statement that read, in part:
To further ensure PPP loans are limited to eligible borrowers, the SBA has decided, in consultation with the Department of the Treasury, that it will review all loans in excess of $2 million, in addition to other loans as appropriate, following the lender’s submission of the borrower’s loan forgiveness application. Regulatory guidance implementing this procedure will be forthcoming.[2]
The statement specifically was issued discussing the review of loans and repayment before the then May 7 deadline to avoid having questions raised regarding the correctness of a borrower’s certification that a loan was necessary.
Read MoreMaximum FSA Carryover Set to 20% of Maximum Deferral and Change in Timing for Reimbursement for Individual Premium Provided for in IRS Notice
In Notice 2020-23[1] the IRS revised the maximum amount a cafeteria plan may allow a participant to carry over to the next year for a medical flexible savings account and clarified that a health plan may reimburse individual insurance policy premium expenses incurred prior to the beginning of the current year.
Read MoreCOVID-19 Relief Provided for §125 Plans and Participants
The IRS has released guidance in Notice 2020-29 that allows for additional flexibility for §125 cafeteria plans given the COVID-19 national emergency that was declared on March 13.[1] The guidance deals with three general issues:
Plans granting employees the right to make or modify elections mid-year in the §125 plan;
Allowing participants to use unused amounts deferred to the plan remaining at the end of 2019 in 2020; and
Allowing retroactive relief to January 1, 2020 for issues related to high deductible health plans and telepath services.
Tax Treatment of CARES Payments to Students Discussed by IRS in FAQ
In yet another set of Frequently Asked Questions on the IRS website, the IRS clarified the tax treatment of funds received by students under provisions of the CARES Act that allows the use of certain funds allocated by the Department of Education to support students.[1]
The IRS cites IRC §139 provisions to support the tax treatments outlined. This provides additional indirect support for those looking to potentially take advantage of §139 to provide tax free relief payments to employees and other parties, as this implicitly finds that the COVID-19 emergency meets the definition of a disaster that is covered by §139.
Read MoreIRS Reverses Course, Qualifying Employers Paying Only Health Care Costs Can Claim Employee Retention Credit
Following a letter written by Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA, Chair Senate Finance Committee), Rep. Richard Neal (D-MA, Chair House Ways & Means Committee) and Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR, Ranking Member Senate Finance Committee) that was critical of the IRS FAQ on the Employee Retention Credit stating that employers could not claim the credit for paying health care benefits for employees on furlough, the IRS has now reversed course.[1]
Read MoreProposed Regulations Upon Which Taxpayers May Rely Issued For Excess Deductions on Termination
The long-awaited proposed regulations on the effect of IRC §67(g) on trusts and estates have now been issued by the IRS.[1] The big item in the proposed regulations is an explanation of the treatment of excess deductions on termination under IRC §642(h)(2) after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act provided, in IRC §67(g), that miscellaneous itemized deductions would no longer be deductible on individual income tax returns.
Existing Reg. §1.642(h)-1 provided that such deductions are “allowed only in computing taxable income and must be taken into account in computing the items of tax preference of beneficiaries; it is not allowed in computing adjusted gross income.” This holding led to such deductions being treated as miscellaneous itemized deductions prior to the TCJA addition of §67(g).
Read MoreSBA Confirms That Borrowers Who Take Advantage of May 14 Extension to Repay Gets Employee Retention Credit
The SBA published guidance[1] in its PPP loan FAQ that duplicates that provided by the IRS earlier, but confirms that a borrower who pays back their PPP loan by May 14 (the extended due date announced by the SBA) will qualify for claiming the Employee Retention Credit. The original IRS guidance providing the relief only mentioned the original May 7 due date for repaying the loan.
Read MoreBorrowers Who Return PPP Loans Under SBA Safe Harbor Will Be Allowed to Claim Employee Retention Credit
As the SBA has advised borrowers who don’t want to have to worry about being asked about whether their certification that their loan application was necessary was made in good faith to repay those loans by May 7 (recently extended to May 14), a question has arisen regarding the employee retention credit (ERC).
An employer who receives a PPP loan is not eligible to claim the employee retention credit per CARES Act §2301(g). If an employer decides to return its PPP loan under the SBA’s safe harbor repayment program, are they still ineligible for the ERC since they did have a PPP loan, even though they have now repaid it?
In now current Question 80 on the IRS’s page for “COVID-19-Related Employee Retention Credits: Interaction with Other Credit and Relief Provisions FAQs,”[1] the answer is that employers who return the funds by May 7 will be able to claim the ERC if otherwise eligible.
Read MoreDeceased Taxpayers' Estates Required to Return Economic Impact Payments, Given Instructions on How to Return the Funds
The IRS has added information to their “Economic Impact Payment Information Center”[1] on their website dealing with payments made to deceased taxpayers.
Shortly after the IRS began issuing economic impact payments (EIP) to taxpayers, reports began coming up of amounts being paid to deceased taxpayers. While the Treasury Secretary indicated that such payments were made in error and should be returned to the government, no specific guidance was issued by the IRS until May 6.
The new guidance both makes clear the IRS position on when the payment will need to be returned and also the mechanics of returning the payment. The May 6 changes also contain information about EIPs related to resident aliens and incarcerated individuals.
Read MoreTax 101 Revisited: Three Key Taxwriters Protest IRS Position on Deduction of PPP Expenses, State the Ruling Is Contrary to Both Congressional Intent and Controlling Authorities
Key members of the Congressional tax-writing committees have, for the second straight day, sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Mnuchin, voicing their displeasure with IRS guidance on a CARES Act issue and requesting that the agency reverse this guidance.[1] This time the letter, signed by Senate Finance Committee Chair Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Ranking Member Ron Wyden (D-OR) and House Ways & Means Committee Chair Richard Neal (D-MA), raises issues with the guidance in Notice 2020-23.
Notice 2020-23 provided that amounts expended that were used to justify the forgiveness of a PPP loan would not be deductible by the taxpayer in computing federal taxable income. The Treasury Secretary had defended that guidance specifically in an interview with Fox News on May 4. Tax Analysts, in a May 5, 2020 story, provided the following quotes from the Fox News Interview:
“The money coming in the PPP is not taxable,” Mnuchin said May 4 in an interview on Fox Business. “So if the money that's coming is not taxable, you can't double dip.”
…
Mnuchin said the IRS guidance is correct, adding, “I have reviewed this personally. This is basically Tax 101.”[2]
Read MoreSBA Extends Deadline to Repay PPP Loans to Avoid Having to Demonstrate Good Faith Certification Loan is Necessary by One Week
Two days before the May 7 due date to return PPP loan funds to gain the presumption that the borrower had made a good faith representation that the loan was necessary, the SBA has granted a one week extension on that deadline in an update to the Payroll Protection Program loan FAQ.[1]
When the SBA published Question 31 that emphasized that borrowers who had sufficient liquidity likely could not have correctly represented the loan was necessary for the business, the agency gave borrowers who had already obtained a loan until May 7 to repay the loan. While the relief says in that case it will be presumed the borrower made a good faith certification, in reality what it does is allow the borrower to avoid the risk of being asked to demonstrate the necessity of the loan and any potential sanctions that might arise if it is found that the certification was not made in good faith.
Read MoreCannabis Business Was a Reseller, Not a Producer, Thus Limiting Costs That Could Be Treated as Costs of Goods Sold
For a cannabis business, it is important to understand if the business is considered a producer, reseller or perhaps a bit of both, since that impacts the calculation of the one thing that such a business can deduct under the restrictions of IRC §280E—cost of goods sold. In the case of Richmond Patients Group v. Commissioner, TC Memo 2020-52[1] the taxpayer attempted to argue it was a producer based on the actions it took. The taxpayer’s position was rejected by the Tax Court.
The issue presents an “Alice in Wonderland” world for many tax professionals—generally a business wants to avoid having costs classified as items that have to be treated as part of cost of goods sold, since such costs are held in inventory until the product is sold. But since §280E bars a deduction for any items except costs of good sold, a cannabis business generally wants to capitalize into inventory as much as the business can.
Read MoreChairs of Taxwriting Committees Ask IRS to Reconsider FAQ on Health Insurance and Employee Retention Credit
The Chairs of both Congressional tax writing committees (House Ways and Means Committee and Senate Finance Committee) and the Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee have sent a letter to Secretary of Treasury Mnuchin questioning the IRS’s position on the payment of health insurance benefits for employees no longer receiving payroll and the employee retention credit enacted as part of the CARES Act.[1]
The employee retention credit, found at Section 2301 of the CARES Act, provides employers who meet certain conditions a credit of up to 50% of amounts paid for certain payroll costs. The question the IRS sought to answer in the FAQ on the matter is whether an employer could claim this credit if it was not currently paying wages to the employee but continued to pay for the employee’s health insurance costs.
Read MoreNew PPP FAQ Questions Address Borrower Application Form Issues for Seasonal Employers and Eligibility of §115 Hospitals
A few hours after adding question 40, the Small Business Administration added another two questions and answers to the frequently asked questions (FAQ) for the payroll protection program loans late on a Sunday evening.[1] These two questions deal with issues that arise for seasonal businesses and the certifications on the SBA Borrower Application Forms as well as whether hospitals exempt from tax under IRC §115 qualify to enter this program.
Read MoreSBA Offers PPP Loan Forgiveness Relief For Employers Whose Employees Turn Down Offer of Reemployment
In its most recent addition to the questions and answers for the Payroll Protection Program loans,[1] the SBA has given some protection on forgiveness for an employer that attempts to rehire an employee if the employee declines the offer of employment.
Question 40 provides:
Question: Will a borrower’s PPP loan forgiveness amount (pursuant to section 1106 of the CARES Act and SBA’s implementing rules and guidance) be reduced if the borrower laid off an employee, offered to rehire the same employee, but the employee declined the offer?
Answer: No. As an exercise of the Administrator’s and the Secretary’s authority under Section 1106(d)(6) of the CARES Act to prescribe regulations granting de minimis exemptions from the Act’s limits on loan forgiveness, SBA and Treasury intend to issue an interim final rule excluding laid-off employees whom the borrower offered to rehire (for the same salary/wages and same number of hours) from the CARES Act’s loan forgiveness reduction calculation. The interim final rule will specify that, to qualify for this exception, the borrower must have made a good faith, written offer of rehire, and the employee’s rejection of that offer must be documented by the borrower. Employees and employers should be aware that employees who reject offers of re-employment may forfeit eligibility for continued unemployment compensation.
Read MoreProcedures for Faxing Forms 1045 and 1139 Updated by the IRS
The IRS has updated the FAQ on the procedures to fax Forms 1045 and 1139 under temporary procedures.[1]
The IRS has updated the initial question describing how the process has changed:
1. How does the process change from the normal hard copy mailing requirement?
Previously, these forms could be filed only via hard copy delivered through the USPS or by a private delivery service. There are well-established procedures for processing the hard copy forms in order to provide quick tentative refunds to taxpayers. A temporary procedure to accept these forms via fax permits us to make the relief in the CARES Act available to taxpayers before IRS processing centers are able to reopen. The procedures to process claims generally remain the same, except as noted in these FAQs. (updated April 30, 2020)
Read MoreDraft of Revised Form 941 Released by IRS - Includes FFCRA and CARES Provisions
The IRS has now published the draft of the Form 941[1] to be used for the rest of 2020. The new form takes into account the changes made by the Families First Coronavirus Response Act and the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act that added various types of payroll tax relief.
Specifically, the form adds lines to account for:
Credit for Qualified Sick and Family Leave Wages;
Employee Retention Credit; and
Deferred Amount of the Employer Share of Social Security Tax.