Newsletters

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) has announced that the mandatory beneficial ownership information (BOI) reporting requirement under the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) is back in effect. Because reporting companies may need additional time to comply with their BOI reporting obligations, FinCEN is generally extending the deadline 30 calendar days from February 19, 2025, for most companies.

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) has announced that the mandatory beneficial ownership information (BOI) reporting requirement under the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) is back in effect. Because reporting companies may need additional time to comply with their BOI reporting obligations, FinCEN is generally extending the deadline 30 calendar days from February 19, 2025, for most companies.

FinCEN's announcement is based on the decision by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (Tyler Division) to stay its prior nationwide injunction order against the reporting requirement (Smith v. U.S. Department of the Treasury, DC Tex., 6:24-cv-00336, Feb. 17, 2025). This district court stayed its prior order, pending appeal, in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent order to stay the nationwide injunction against the reporting requirement that had been ordered by a different federal district court in Texas (McHenry v. Texas Top Cop Shop, Inc., SCt, No. 24A653, Jan. 23, 2025).

Given this latest district court decision, the regulations implementing the BOI reporting requirements of the CTA are no longer stayed.

Updated Reporting Deadlines

Subject to any applicable court orders, BOI reporting is now mandatory, but FinCEN is providing additional time for companies to report:

• For most reporting companies, the extended deadline to file an initial, updated, and/or corrected BOI report is now March 21, 2025. FinCEN expects to provide an update before that date of any further modification of the deadline, recognizing that reporting companies may need additional time to comply.
• Reporting companies that were previously given a reporting deadline later than March 21, 2025, must file their initial BOI report by that later deadline. For example, if a company’s reporting deadline is in April 2025 because it qualifies for certain disaster relief extensions, it should follow the April deadline, not the March deadline.

Plaintiffs in National Small Business United v. Yellen, DC Ala., No. 5:22-cv-01448, are not required to report their beneficial ownership information to FinCEN at this time.

FinCEN Notice FIN-2025-CTA1

The IRS has issued Notice 2025-15, providing guidance on an alternative method for furnishing health coverage statements under Code Secs. 6055 and 6056. This method allows insurers and applicable large employers (ALEs) to comply with their reporting obligations by posting an online notice rather than automatically furnishing statements to individuals.

The IRS has issued Notice 2025-15, providing guidance on an alternative method for furnishing health coverage statements under Code Secs. 6055 and 6056. This method allows insurers and applicable large employers (ALEs) to comply with their reporting obligations by posting an online notice rather than automatically furnishing statements to individuals.

Under Code Sec. 6055, entities providing minimum essential coverage must report coverage details to the IRS and furnish statements to responsible individuals. Similarly, Code Sec. 6056 requires ALEs, generally those with 50 or more full-time employees, to report health insurance information for those employees. The Paperwork Burden Reduction Act amended these sections to introduce an alternative furnishing method, effective for statements related to returns for calendar years after 2023.

Instead of automatically providing statements, reporting entities may post a clear and conspicuous notice on their websites, informing individuals that they may request a copy of their statement. The notice must be posted by the original furnishing deadline, including any automatic 30-day extension, and must remain accessible through October 15 of the following year. If a responsible individual or full-time employee requests a statement, the reporting entity must furnish it within 30 days of the request or by January 31 of the following year, whichever is later.

For statements related to the 2024 calendar year, the notice must be posted by March 3, 2025. Statements may be furnished electronically if permitted under Reg. § 1.6055-2 for minimum essential coverage providers and Reg. § 301.6056-2 for ALEs.

This alternative method applies regardless of whether the individual shared responsibility payment under Code Sec. 5000A is zero. The guidance clarifies that this method applies to statements required under both Code Sec. 6055 and Code Sec. 6056. Reg. § 1.6055-1(g)(4)(ii)(B) sets forth the requirements for the alternative manner of furnishing statements under Code Sec. 6055, while the same framework applies to Code Sec. 6056 with relevant terminology adjustments. Form 1095-B, used for reporting minimum essential coverage, and Form 1095-C, used by ALEs to report health insurance offers, may be provided under this alternative method.

Notice 2025-15

The IRS has issued the luxury car depreciation limits for business vehicles placed in service in 2025 and the lease inclusion amounts for business vehicles first leased in 2025.

The IRS has issued the luxury car depreciation limits for business vehicles placed in service in 2025 and the lease inclusion amounts for business vehicles first leased in 2025.

Luxury Passenger Car Depreciation Caps

The luxury car depreciation caps for a passenger car placed in service in 2025 limit annual depreciation deductions to:

• $12,200 for the first year without bonus depreciation
• $20,200 for the first year with bonus depreciation
• $19,600 for the second year
• $11,800 for the third year
• $7,060 for the fourth through sixth year

Depreciation Caps for SUVs, Trucks and Vans

The luxury car depreciation caps for a sport utility vehicle, truck, or van placed in service in 2025 are:

• $12,200 for the first year without bonus depreciation
• $20,200 for the first year with bonus depreciation
• $19,600 for the second year
• $11,800 for the third year
• $7,060 for the fourth through sixth year

Excess Depreciation on Luxury Vehicles

If depreciation exceeds the annual cap, the excess depreciation is deducted beginning in the year after the vehicle’s regular depreciation period ends.

The annual cap for this excess depreciation is:

• $7,060 for passenger cars and
• $7,060 for SUVS, trucks, and vans.

Lease Inclusion Amounts for Cars, SUVs, Trucks and Vans

If a vehicle is first leased in 2025, a taxpayer must add a lease inclusion amount to gross income in each year of the lease if its fair market value at the time of the lease is more than:

• $62,000 for a passenger car, or
• $62,000 for an SUV, truck or van.

The 2025 lease inclusion tables provide the lease inclusion amounts for each year of the lease.

The lease inclusion amount results in a permanent reduction in the taxpayer’s deduction for the lease payments.

Rev. Proc. 2025-16

The leadership of the Senate Finance Committee have issued a discussion draft of bipartisan legislative proposals to make administrative and procedural improvements to the Internal Revenue Service.

A limited liability company (LLC) classified as a TEFRA partnership could not claim a charitable contribution deduction for a conservation easement because the easement deed failed to comply with the perpetuity requirements under Code Sec. 170(h)(5)(A) and Reg. § 1.170A-14(g)(6). The Tax Court determined that the language of the deed did not satisfy statutory requirements, rendering the claimed deduction invalid.

A limited liability company (LLC) classified as a TEFRA partnership could not claim a charitable contribution deduction for a conservation easement because the easement deed failed to comply with the perpetuity requirements under Code Sec. 170(h)(5)(A) and Reg. § 1.170A-14(g)(6). The Tax Court determined that the language of the deed did not satisfy statutory requirements, rendering the claimed deduction invalid.

Easement Valuation

The taxpayer asserted that the highest and best use of the property was as a commercial mining site, supporting a valuation significantly higher than its purchase price. However, the Court concluded that the record did not support this assertion. The Court found that the proposed mining use was not financially feasible or maximally productive. The IRS’s expert relied on comparable sales data, while the taxpayer’s valuation method was based on a discounted cash-flow analysis, which the Court found speculative and not supported by market data.

Penalties

The taxpayer contended that the IRS did not comply with supervisory approval process under Code Sec. 6751(b) prior to imposing penalties. However, the Court found that the concerned IRS revenue agent duly obtained prior supervisory approval and the IRS satisfied the procedural requirements under Code Sec. 6751(b). Because the valuation of the easement reported on the taxpayer’s return exceeded 200 percent of the Court-determined value, the misstatement was deemed "gross" under Code Sec. 6662(h)(2)(A)(i). Accordingly, the Court upheld accuracy-related penalties under Code Sec. 6662 for gross valuation misstatement, substantial understatement, and negligence.

Green Valley Investors, LLC, TC Memo. 2025-15, Dec. 62,617(M)

The Tax Court ruled that IRS Appeals Officers and Team Managers were not "Officers of the United States." Therefore, they did not need to be appointed under the Appointments Clause.

The Tax Court ruled that IRS Appeals Officers and Team Managers were not "Officers of the United States." Therefore, they did not need to be appointed under the Appointments Clause.

The taxpayer filed income taxes for tax years 2012 (TY) through TY 2017, but he did not pay tax. During a Collection Due Process (CDP) hearing, the taxpayer raised constitutional arguments that IRS Appeals and associated employees serve in violation of the Appointments Clause and the constitutional separation of powers.

No Significant Authority

The court noted that IRS Appeals officers do not wield significant authority. For instance, the officers do not have authority to examine witnesses, unlike Tax Court Special Trial Judges (STJs) and SEC Administrative Law Judges (ALJs). The Appeals officers also lack the power to issue, serve, and enforce summonses through the IRS’s general power to examine books and witnesses.

The court found no reason to deviate from earlier judgments in Tucker v. Commissioner (Tucker I), 135 T.C. 114, Dec. 58,279); and Tucker v. Commissioner (Tucker II), CA-DC, 676 F.3d 1129, 2012-1 ustc ¶50,312). Both judgments emphasized the court’s observations in the current case. In Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (per curiam), the Supreme Court similarly held that Federal Election Commission (FEC) commissioners were not appointed in accordance with the Appointments Clause, and thus none of them were permitted to exercise "significant authority."

The taxpayer lacked standing to challenge the appointment of the IRS Appeals Chief, and said officers under the Appointments Clause, and the removal of the Chief under the separation of powers doctrine.

IRC Chief of Appeals

The taxpayer failed to prove that the Chief’s tenure affected his hearing and prejudiced him in some way, under standards in United States v. Smith, 962 F.3d 755 (4th Cir. 2020) and United States v. Castillo, 772 F. App’x 11 (3d Cir. 2019). The Chief did not participate in the taxpayer's CDP hearing, and so the Chief did not injure the taxpayer. The taxpayer's injury was not fairly traceable to the appointment (or lack thereof) of the Chief, and the Chief was too distant from the case for any court order pointed to him to redress the taxpayer's harm.

C.C. Tooke III, 164 TC No. 2, Dec. 62,610

The IRS and the Treasury Department have issued guidance to employers about reporting the amount of qualified sick and family leave wages paid to employees for leave taken in 2021 on Form W-2, Wage and Tax Statement.

The IRS and the Treasury Department have issued guidance to employers about reporting the amount of qualified sick and family leave wages paid to employees for leave taken in 2021 on Form W-2, Wage and Tax Statement. Further, the notice provides guidance under recent legislation, including: the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) ( P.L. 116-127), as amended by the COVID-Related Tax Relief Act of 2020 (Division N of P.L. 116-260) and the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 ( P.L. 117-2). Employers are required to report these amounts to employees either on Form W-2, Box 14, or in a separate statement provided with the Form W-2. The wage amount that the notice requires employers to report on Form W-2 will provide employees who are also self-employed with the information necessary to determine the amount of any sick and family leave equivalent credits they may claim in their self-employed capacities.

Reporting Requirements
The guidance requires eligible employers to report to employees the amount of qualified sick leave wages and qualified family leave wages paid to the employees under (i) sections 7001 or 7003 of the Families First Act for leave provided during the period beginning January 1, 2021, through March 31, 2021, and (ii) Code Secs. 3131 and 3132 for leave provided during the period beginning April 1, 2021, through September 30, 2021. Moreover, eligible employers have separate reporting requirements for (i) leave provided to employees during the period beginning January 1, 2021, through March 31, 2021, under the Families First Act; and (ii) leave provided to employees during the period beginning April 1, 2021, through September 30, 2021, under Code Secs. 3131 and 3132.

Specific Reporting Instructions
Qualified leave wages paid in 2021 under the Families First Act and Code Secs. 3131 and 3132 are to be reported in Box 1 of Form W-2. To the extent that qualified leave wages are social security wages or Medicare wages, they must also be included in Box 3 (up to the social security wage base) and Box 5, respectively.

In addition to the regular reporting requirements, employers must report the following types and amounts of the wages that were paid, with each amount separately reported either in Box 14 of Form W-2 or on a separate statement to the employee:

• the total amount of qualified sick leave wages paid for reasons described in paragraphs (1), (2), or (3) of section 5102(a) of the Emergency Paid Sick Leave Act (EPSLA) with respect to leave provided to employees during the period beginning on January 1, 2021, through March 31, 2021 (sick leave wages subject to the $511 per day limit);
• the total amount of qualified sick leave wages paid for reasons described in paragraphs (4), (5), or (6) of section 5102(a) of EPSLA with respect to leave provided to employees during the period beginning on January 1, 2021, through March 31, 2021 (sick leave wages subject to the $200 per day limit);
• the total amount of qualified family leave wages paid to the employee under the Emergency Family and Medical Leave Expansion Act (EFMLEA) with respect to leave provided to employees during the period beginning on January 1, 2021, through March 31, 2021;
• the total amount of qualified sick leave wages paid for reasons described in paragraphs (1), (2), or (3) of section 5102(a) of section 5102(a) of EPSLA with respect to leave provided to employees during the period beginning on April 1, 2021, through September 30, 2021;
• the total amount of qualified sick leave wages paid for reasons described in paragraphs (4), (5), or (6) of section 5102(a) of EPSLA with respect to leave provided to employees during the period beginning on April 1, 2021, through September 30, 2021;
• the total amount of qualified family leave wages paid to the employee under EFMLEA with respect to leave provided to employees during the period beginning on April 1, 2021, through September 30, 2021.

Model Language for Employee Instructions
As part of the Instructions for Employee, under the instructions for Box 14, for the Forms W-2, or in a separate statement sent to the employee, the employer may provide additional information about qualified sick leave wages and qualified family leave wages, and explain that these wages may limit the amount of the qualified sick leave equivalent or qualified family leave equivalent credits to which the employee may be entitled with respect to any self-employment income. The guidance provides model language for employee instructions.

Self-Employment Tax Reporting
If taxpayers have self-employment income in addition to wages paid by an employer, and they intend to claim any qualified sick leave or qualified family leave equivalent credits, they must report the qualified sick leave or qualified family leave wages on Form 7202, Credits for Sick Leave and Family Leave for Certain Self-Employed Individuals, included with their income tax return. The self-employed taxpayer may have to reduce (but not below zero) any qualified sick leave or qualified family leave equivalent amounts by these qualified leave wages.

The IRS has issued temporary and proposed regulations that authorize the assessment of any erroneous refund of the COVID-19 employment tax credits which were added by the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 ( P.L. 117-2). These credits for certain wages paid by employers are:

The IRS has issued temporary and proposed regulations that authorize the assessment of any erroneous refund of the COVID-19 employment tax credits which were added by the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 ( P.L. 117-2). These credits for certain wages paid by employers are:

• the Credit for Paid Sick Leave under Code Sec. 3131,
• the Credit for Paid Family Leave under Code Sec. 3132, and
• the Employee Retention Credit under Code Sec. 3134.

The text of the temporary regulations also serves as the text of the proposed regulations.

The temporary regulations apply to all credits under Code Secs. 3131 and 3132, including any increases to the credits under Code Sec. 3133, credited or refunded on or after April 1, 2021, including advanced refunds, as well as all credits under Code Sec. 3134 that are credited or refunded on or after July 1, 2021, including advanced refunds.

Erroneous Refunds
These credits are taken against the employer's share of Medicare tax imposed under Code Sec. 3111(b) and the attributable Railroad Retirement Tax Act tax imposed under Code Sec. 3221(a). If the amount of the credits exceeds these taxes for any calendar quarter, then the excess must be treated as an overpayment to be refunded or credited under Code Secs. 6402(a) and 6413(b). Any credits claimed that exceed the amount to which the employer is entitled, and that are actually credited or refunded by the IRS, are considered to be erroneous refunds of these credits.

If a small eligible employer specified in Code Sec. 3134(j)(2) receives excess advance payments of the credit, then the tax imposed under Code Sec. 3111(b) (or the attributable Code Sec. 3221(a) tax) for the calendar quarter are increased by the excess amount.

The temporary regulations provide that erroneous refunds of these credits are treated as underpayments of the taxes imposed under Code Sec. 3111(b) (and the attributable Code Sec. 3221(a) tax). The temporary regulations authorize the IRS to assess any credits erroneously credited, paid, or refunded in excess of the amount allowed as if those amounts were the applicable taxes, subject to assessment and administrative collection procedures. This allows the IRS to prevent the avoidance of the purposes of the limitations under the credit provisions, and to recover the erroneous refund amounts efficiently, while also preserving administrative protections afforded to taxpayers with respect to contesting their tax liabilities under the Code and avoiding unnecessary costs and burdens associated with litigation.

These assessment and administrative collection procedures do not replace the existing recapture methods, but instead represent an alternative method available to the IRS.

Any amount of the credits for qualified leave wages and certain collectively bargained contributions under Code Secs. 3131 and 3132, plus any amount of credits for qualified health plan expenses under Code Secs. 3131(d) and 3132(d), and including any increases in these credits under Code Sec. 3133, and any amount of the employee retention credit for qualified wages under Code Sec. 3134 that are erroneously refunded or credited to an employer must be treated as underpayments of the employer’s share of the applicable Medicare tax by the employer, and may be administratively assessed and collected in the same manner as the taxes. The temporary regulations provide that the determination of any amount of credits erroneously refunded must take into account any credit amounts advanced to an employer under the process established by the IRS.

In certain situations, third-party payors claim tax credits on behalf of their common law employer clients. The temporary regulations address this by providing that employers against which an erroneous refund of credits may be assessed as an underpayment include persons treated as the employer under Code Secs. 3401(d), 3504, and 3511, consistent with their liability for the employment taxes against which the credits applied.

Effective Date; Request for Comments
The temporary regulations are effective on the date they are published in the Federal Register.

A public hearing on the proposed regulations will be scheduled if requested in writing by any person who timely submits electronic or written comments. Written or electronic comments and requests for a public hearing must be received by the date that is 60 days after the proposed regulations are published in the Federal Register.

The IRS has allowed taxpayers to use electronic or digital signatures on certain paper forms they cannot file electronically.

The IRS has allowed taxpayers to use electronic or digital signatures on certain paper forms they cannot file electronically. The Service has balanced the e-signature option with critical security and protection needed against identity theft and fraud. The IRS will accept a wide range of electronic signatures. Acceptable electronic signature methods include:

• a typed name typed on a signature block;
• a scanned or digitized image of a handwritten signature that’s attached to an electronic record;
• a handwritten signature input onto an electronic signature pad;
• a handwritten signature, mark or command input on a display screen with a stylus device; and
• a signature created by a third-party software.

Moreover, the IRS will accept images of signatures (scanned or photographed) including common file types supported by Microsoft 365 such as tiff, jpg, jpeg, pdf, Microsoft Office Suite, or Zip.

The IRS has allowed taxpayers and representatives to use electronic or digital signatures on paper forms, which they cannot file using IRS e-file, including for example:

• Form 11-C, Occupational Tax and Registration Return for Wagering;
• Form 637, Application for Registration (For Certain Excise Tax Activities);
• Form 706, U.S. Estate (and Generation-Skipping Transfer) Tax Return and other forms in the 706 series;
• Form 709, U.S. Gift (and Generation-Skipping Transfer) Tax Return;
• Form 730, Monthly Tax Return for Wagers;
• Form 1066, U.S. Income Tax Return for Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduit;
• Form 1120-C, U.S. Income Tax Return for Cooperative Associations and other forms in the 1120 series;
• Form 3520, Annual Return To Report Transactions With Foreign Trusts and Receipt of Certain Foreign Gifts; and
• Form 3520-A, Annual Information Return of Foreign Trust With a U.S. Owner.