Dr. Ikramul Haq’s Post

We would like to share with you the article written by one of our associates, Atty. Rio Krisel G. Bautista, entitled, “Deficiency Interest and Delinquency Interest on Unpaid Taxes – No More Double Imposition” which was published in the More to Follow column in the Business Section of The Manila Times on May 16, 2024. “In this week’s article, the author discusses how the Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion Law (TRAIN Law) specifically barred the simultaneous imposition of deficiency interests and delinquency interests on unpaid taxes under Section 249 of the Tax Code.” Read more: https://lnkd.in/g3vvSFXt Should you have questions on the above article, please do not hesitate to contact us at [email protected]. #taxcode #TRAINLaw #deficiencyinterest #delinquencyinterest #unpaidtaxes #taxphilippines #mtflaw #mtfcounsel #mataperez

On June 17, 2024, the IRS published Revenue Ruling 2024-14 as part of a package it says will raise an additional $50 billion dollars of income taxes over the next decade from “basis-shifting transactions.” In addition to the Revenue Ruling, the package includes three proposed regulations affecting basis adjustments. Read the full ruling update by Liskow attorneys Leon Rittenberg III, John Rouchell, and Kevin Naccari, Jr. on the #GulfCoastBusinessLawBlog below.

The Constitutional Court has provided clarity on taxing trusts and their beneficiaries, ruling in favour of SARS. The case focused on the flow-through principle and taxation of capital gains and involved a complex debate between Section 25B and Paragraph 80(2) of the Income Tax Act. Joon Chong highlighted that the conduit principle applied only to Zenprop, not Thistle, leading to a higher tax bill. However, concerns remain over the lack of clarity on 'bona fide inadvertent errors' in taxation penalties. Read more: https://bit.ly/3TRt1Q4 #TaxLaw

Have you heard of the Supreme Court granting certiorari in the Moore v. US case? Do you file income taxes and want to understand what it means to have income? Are you a friend who wants to enjoy something I wrote? Check out this blog post that I authored with Kevin Wilkes, JD, LL.M and Tiffany Ippolito, JD, LLM (Tax). The article discusses the arguments of both the Government and the Moores' in the case and the implications of the Court hearing the first constitutional challenge to the income tax powers of Congress under the 16th Amendment since Eisner v. Macomber.

The challenge over realized but undistributed corporate income in the Supreme Court case of Moore v. United States is said to be an opening skirmish on the constitutionality of a potential federal wealth tax. Proponents claim a wealth levy is within the constitutional category of “indirect taxes” and therefore not subject to apportionment among the states. Opponents counter that an exaction of that sort would be a direct tax, and therefore subject to apportionment. This particular disagreement is the latest in a centuries’-long controversy over how the Constitution distinguishes direct from indirect taxes. https://lnkd.in/gmyAeiGN

Update from BEPC's Legislative Committee: Estate Tax Treatment of Out-of-State Real Estate In a recently passed bill, the Massachusetts Legislature conclusively defined the Massachusetts taxable estate as excluding real property and tangible personal property located outside the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. This bill was signed by Governor Healey into law on September 16, 2024. Prior to the passage of this amendment, there was some confusion as to whether practitioners needed to prorate the state death tax credit for the portion of the estate attributable to real property located outside of Massachusetts or whether we could rely on Dassori v. Commissioner of Revenue which had previously excluded real property held outside the country from MA estate tax. Additional detail can be found within Section 13 of Chapter 206 of the Acts of 2024, https://lnkd.in/g3JB3pvF. https://www.bepc.org/news/

It's not often the US Supreme Court hears a taxation case. Yesterday's decision in Moore was only the sixth tax ruling this century: a win for the government on the narrow facts in question, but doubt remains over the #constitutional basis for possible future #tax reforms. in particular, proponents of a wealth tax will be concerned about the constitutional hurdles that many #SCOTUS justices raised. Questions also remain about how the court might rule on the US legislating an Income Inclusion Rule under Pillar Two.

📢 𝐁𝐑𝐄𝐀𝐊𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐍𝐄𝐖𝐒: 𝐃𝐮𝐭𝐜𝐡 𝐒𝐮𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐭 𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐧𝐞𝐰 𝐛𝐨𝐱 3 𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐢𝐬𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 Today, on June 6th 2024 the Dutch Supreme Court has issued a judgment that will affect a lot of taxpayers. They have decided that the new legislation applicable to Dutch income tax in box 3 (Restoration Act) still violates the treaty prohibition of discrimination and the fundamental right of ownership. Box 3 income tax is the income tax on property collection and investment. In cases where the fictitious return is higher than the actual return, legal redress must be granted. This restoration of rights must mean that the tax assessment is reduced so far that only tax in box 3 is levied on the actual return. It is up to the taxpayer to demonstrate that his actual return is lower than the fictitious return. The Supreme Court has provided further rules for the calculation of that actual return. Make sure to contact us if you feel you are affected by this judgment. We are happy to examine your personal tax status and the right to have your income tax assessment(s) amended. #News #Box3 #DutchSupremeCourt #Tax

📢 𝐁𝐑𝐄𝐀𝐊𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐍𝐄𝐖𝐒: 𝐃𝐮𝐭𝐜𝐡 𝐒𝐮𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐭 𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐧𝐞𝐰 𝐛𝐨𝐱 3 𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐢𝐬𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 Today, on June 6th 2024 the Dutch Supreme Court has issued a judgment that will affect a lot of taxpayers. They have decided that the new legislation applicable to Dutch income tax in box 3 (Restoration Act) still violates the treaty prohibition of discrimination and the fundamental right of ownership. Box 3 income tax is the income tax on property collection and investment. In cases where the fictitious return is higher than the actual return, legal redress must be granted. This restoration of rights must mean that the tax assessment is reduced so far that only tax in box 3 is levied on the actual return. It is up to the taxpayer to demonstrate that his actual return is lower than the fictitious return. The Supreme Court has provided further rules for the calculation of that actual return. Make sure to contact us if you feel you are affected by this judgment. We are happy to examine your personal tax status and the right to have your income tax assessment(s) amended. #News #Box3 #DutchSupremeCourt #Tax