Sarah Fantazia has been with Jones & Roth since 2008. Her primary focus is in audit and assurance services for nonprofit organizations and commercial companies across a variety of industries. Sarah also provides tax services to individuals and businesses.
Sarah is a senior manager on Jones & Roth’s Nonprofit Organizations team and Affordable Housing team. Her experience with nonprofit organizations includes Single Audits and information return preparation. Her experience in the affordable housing industry includes assurance and tax preparation services for affordable housing limited partnerships.
Sarah holds a Bachelor of Arts in Accounting with a minor in Spanish from Portland State University.
- AICPA – American Institute of Certified Public Accountants
- OSCPA – Oregon Society of Certified Public Accountants
Income and losses from investment real estate or rental property are passive by definition — unless you’re a real estate professional. Why does this matter? Passive income may be subject to the 3.8% net investment income tax (NIIT), and passive losses generally are deductible only against passive income, with the excess being carried forward.
Of course the NIIT is part of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and might be eliminated under ACA repeal and replace legislation or tax reform legislation. But if/when such legislation will be passed and signed into law is uncertain. Even if the NIIT is eliminated, the passive loss issue will still be an important one for many taxpayers investing in real estate.
To qualify as a real estate professional, you must annually perform:
• More than 50% of your personal services in real property trades or businesses in which you materially participate, and
• More than 750 hours of service in these businesses.
Each year stands on its own, and there are other nuances. (Special rules for spouses may help you meet the 750-hour test.)
If you’re concerned you’ll fail either test and be subject to the 3.8% NIIT or stuck with passive losses, consider doing one of the following:
Increasing your involvement in the real estate activity. If you can pass the real estate professional tests, the activity no longer will be subject to passive activity rules.
Looking at other activities. If you have passive losses from your real estate investment, consider investing in another income-producing trade or business that will be passive to you. That way, you’ll have passive income that can absorb some or all of your passive losses.
Disposing of the activity. This generally allows you to deduct all passive losses — including any loss on disposition (subject to basis and capital loss limitations). But, again, the rules are complex.
Also be aware that the IRS frequently challenges claims of real estate professional status — and is often successful. One situation where the IRS commonly prevails is when the taxpayer didn’t keep adequate records of time spent on real estate activities.
If you’re not sure whether you qualify as a real estate professional, please contact us. We can help you make this determination and guide you on how to properly document your hours.
It’s a smaller business world after all. With the ease and popularity of e-commerce, as well as the incredible efficiency of many supply chains, companies of all sorts are finding it easier than ever to widen their markets. Doing so has become so much more feasible that many businesses quickly find themselves crossing state lines.
But therein lies a risk: Operating in another state means possibly being subject to taxation in that state. The resulting liability can, in some cases, inhibit profitability. But sometimes it can produce tax savings.
Do you have “nexus”?
Essentially, “nexus” means a business presence in a given state that’s substantial enough to trigger that state’s tax rules and obligations.
Precisely what activates nexus in a given state depends on that state’s chosen criteria. Triggers can vary but common criteria include:
• Employing workers in the state,
• Owning (or, in some cases even leasing) property there,
• Marketing your products or services in the state,
• Maintaining a substantial amount of inventory there, and
• Using a local telephone number.
Then again, one generally can’t say that nexus has a “hair trigger.” A minimal amount of business activity in a given state probably won’t create tax liability there. For example, an HVAC company that makes a few tech calls a year across state lines probably wouldn’t be taxed in that state. Or let’s say you ask a salesperson to travel to another state to establish relationships or gauge interest. As long as he or she doesn’t close any sales, and you have no other activity in the state, you likely won’t have nexus.
If your company already operates in another state and you’re unsure of your tax liabilities there — or if you’re thinking about starting up operations in another state — consider conducting a nexus study. This is a systematic approach to identifying the out-of-state taxes to which your business activities may expose you.
Keep in mind that the results of a nexus study may not be negative. You might find that your company’s overall tax liability is lower in a neighboring state. In such cases, it may be advantageous to create nexus in that state (if you don’t already have it) by, say, setting up a small office there. If all goes well, you may be able to allocate some income to that state and lower your tax bill.
The complexity of state tax laws offers both risk and opportunity. Contact us for help ensuring your business comes out on the winning end of a move across state lines.
More professional practices (and practice groups) should look into them.
In corporate America, pension plans are fading away: 59% of Fortune 500 companies offered them to new hires in 1998, but by 2015, only 20% did. In contrast, some legal, medical, accounting, and engineering firms are keeping the spirit of the traditional pension plan alive by adopting cash balance plans.1
Owners and partners of these highly profitable businesses sometimes get a late start on retirement planning. Cash balance plans give them a chance to catch up. Contributions to these defined benefit plans are age dependent: the older you are, the more you can potentially sock away each year for retirement. In 2016, a 55-year-old could defer as much as $180,000 a year into a cash balance plan; a 65-year-old, as much as $245,000.2
These plans are not for every business as they demand consistent contributions from the plan sponsor. Yet, they may prove less expensive to a company than a classic pension plan, and offer significantly greater funding flexibility and employee benefits compared to a defined contribution plan, such as a 401(k).2,3,4,5
How does a cash balance plan differ from a traditional pension plan? In a cash balance plan, a business or professional practice maintains an account for each employee with a hypothetical “balance” of pay credits (i.e., employer contributions) plus interest credits. There can be no discrimination in favor of partners, executives, or older employees; the owner(s) have to be able to make contributions for other employees as well. The plan pays out a pension-style monthly income stream to the participant at retirement – either a set dollar amount or a percentage of compensation. Lump-sum payouts are also an option.3,4
Each year, a plan participant receives a pay credit equaling 5-8% of his or her compensation, augmented by an interest credit commonly linked to the performance of an equity index or the yield of the 30-year Treasury (the investment credit can be variable or fixed). Cash balance plans are commonly portable: the vested portion of the account balance can be paid out if an employee leaves before a retirement date.2
As an example of how credits are accrued, let’s say an employee named Joe Green earns $75,000 annually at the XYZ Group. He participates in a cash balance plan that provides a 5% annual salary credit and a 5% annual interest credit once there is a balance. Joe’s first-year pay credit would be $3,750 with no interest credit as there was no balance in his hypothetical account at the start of his first year of participation. For year two (assuming no raises), Joe would get another $3,750 pay credit and an interest credit of $3,750 x 5% = $187.50. So, at the end of two years of participation, his hypothetical account would have a balance of $7,687.50.
An employer takes on considerable responsibility with a cash balance plan. It must make annual contributions to the plan, and an actuary must determine the minimum yearly contribution to keep the plan appropriately funded. The employer effectively assumes the investment risk, not the employee. For example, if the plan says it will award participants a fixed 5% interest credit each year, and asset performance does not generate that large a credit, the employer may have to contribute more to the plan to fulfill its promise. The employer and the financial professional consulting the employer about the plan determine the investment choices, which usually lean conservative.2,4
Employer contributions to the plan for a given tax year must be made by the federal income tax deadline for that year (plus extensions). Funding the plan before the end of a calendar year is fine; the employer just needs to understand that any overage will represent contributions not tax-deductible. The plan must cover at least 50 employees or 40% of the firm’s workforce.4
Cash balance plans typically cost a company between $2,000-5,000 to create and between $2,000-10,000 per year to run. That may seem expensive, but a cash balance plan offers owners the potential to keep excess profits earned above the annual interest credit owed to employees. Another perk is that cash balance plans can be used in tandem with 401(k) plans.3,4,5
These plans can be structured to reward owners appropriately. When a traditional defined benefit plan uses a safe harbor formula, rank-and-file employees may be rewarded more than owners and executives would prefer. Cash balance plan formulas can remedy this situation.5
Benefit allocations are based on career average pay, not just “the best years.” In a traditional defined benefit plan, the eventual benefit is based on a 3- to 5-year average of peak employee compensation multiplied by years of service. In a cash balance plan, the benefit is determined using an average of all years of compensation.5
Cash balance plans are less sensitive to interest rates than old-school pension plans. As rates rise and fall, liabilities in a traditional pension plan fluctuate. This opens a door to either overfunding or underfunding (and underfunding is a major risk right now with such low interest rates). By contrast, a cash balance plan has relatively minor variations in liability valuation.5
A cash balance plan cannot be administered with any degree of absentmindedness. It must pass yearly non-discrimination tests; it must be submitted for IRS approval every five years instead of every six. Obviously, a plan document must be drawn up and periodically amended, and there are the usual annual reporting requirements.5
Ideally, a cash balance plan is run by highly compensated employees (HCEs) of a firm who are within their prime earning years. Regarding non-discrimination, a company should try to aim for at least a 5:1 ratio – there should at least be 1 HCE plan participant for every 5 other plan participants. In the best-case scenario for non-discrimination testing, the HCEs are 10-15 years older than half (or more) of the company’s workers.4,5
If a worst-case scenario occurs and a company founders, cash balance plan participants have a degree of protection for their balances. Their benefits are insured up to their maximum value by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC). If a cash balance plan is terminated, plan participants can receive their balances as a lump sum, roll the money over into an IRA, or request that the plan sponsor transfer its liability to an insurer (with the pension benefits paid to the plan participant via an insurance contract).3,4
Cash balance plans have grown increasingly popular. Some businesses have even adopted dual profit-sharing and cash balance plans. Maybe it is time for your firm to look into this intriguing alternative to the traditional pension plan.
Mark Reynolds, CPA Mark Reynolds is a Senior Manager and leader of Jones & Roth Retirement Plan Services. Mark works with small to medium size retirement plans, focusing on optimal plan design, to ensure Plan Sponsors are able to maximize benefits for both the Plan Sponsor and the participants.
This material was prepared by MarketingPro, Inc., and does not necessarily represent the views of the presenting party, nor their affiliates. This information has been derived from sources believed to be accurate. Please note – investing involves risk, and past performance is no guarantee of future results. The publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other professional services. If assistance is needed, the reader is advised to engage the services of a competent professional. This information should not be construed as investment, tax or legal advice and may not be relied on for the purpose of avoiding any Federal tax penalty. This is neither a solicitation nor recommendation to purchase or sell any investment or insurance product or service, and should not be relied upon as such. All indices are unmanaged and are not illustrative of any particular investment.
Securities offered through 1st Global Capital Corp., Member FINRA, SIPC. Investment advisory services offered through 1st Global Advisors, Inc. Insurance services offered through 1st Global Insurance Services, Inc. This email is subject to review & retention requirements under federal securities law
1 – reuters.com/article/us-column-miller-pensions-idUSKCN10M12L [8/11/16]
2 – thinkadvisor.com/2016/11/01/cash-balance-plans-supersize-small-business-retire [11/1/16]
3 – investopedia.com/articles/financial-advisors/092315/cash-balance-pensions-pros-cons-small-biz.asp [9/23/15]
4 – retirewire.com/cash-balance-plan/ [11/21/16]
5 – cashbalanceactuaries.com/cash-balance-vs.-defined-benefit-plans [1/17/17]