Skip to Main Content

insightsarticles

IRS unrelated business taxable income update: The good news and the missing news

04.29.20

Read this if you are a tax-exempt organization.

The IRS recently issued proposed regulations (REG-106864-18) related to Internal Revenue Code Section 512(a)(6), which requires tax-exempt entities to calculate unrelated business taxable income (UBTI) separately for each unrelated trade or business carried on by the organization.

For years beginning after December 31, 2017, exempt organizations with more than one unrelated trade or business are no longer permitted to aggregate income and deductions from all unrelated trades or businesses when calculating UBTI. In August 2018, the IRS issued Notice 2018-67, which discussed and solicited comments regarding various issues arising under Code Section 512(a)(6) and set forth interim guidance and transition rules relating to that section. 

The good news
The new proposed regulations expand upon Notice 2018-67 and provide for the following:

  • An exempt organization would identify each of its separate unrelated trades or businesses using the first two digits of the NAICS code that most accurately describes the trade or business. Activities in different geographic areas may be aggregated.
  • The total UBTI of an organization with more than one unrelated trade or business would be the sum of the UBTI computed with respect to each separate unrelated trade or business (subject to the limitation that UBTI with respect to any separate unrelated trade or business cannot be less than zero). 
  • An exempt organization with more than one unrelated trade or business would determine the NOL deduction allowed separately with respect to each of its unrelated trades or businesses.
  • An organization with losses arising in a tax year beginning before January 1, 2018 (pre-2018 NOLs), and with losses arising in a tax year beginning after December 31, 2017 (post-2017 NOLs), would deduct its pre-2018 NOLs from total UBTI before deducting any post-2017 NOLs with regard to a separate unrelated trade or business against the UBTI from such trade or business. 
  • An organization's investment activities would be treated collectively as a separate unrelated trade or business. In general, an organization's investment activities would be limited to its:
     
    1. Qualifying partnership interests
    2. Qualifying S corporation interests
    3. Debt-financed property or properties 

Organizations described in Code Sec. 501(c)(3) are classified as publicly supported charities if they meet certain support tests. The proposed regulations would permit an organization with more than one unrelated trade or business to aggregate its net income and net losses from all of its unrelated business activities for purposes of determining whether the organization is publicly supported. 

The missing news: Unaddressed items from the new guidance
With the changes provided by these proposed regulations we anticipate less complexity and lower compliance costs in applying Code Section 512(a)(6). While this new guidance is considered taxpayer friendly, the IRS still has more work to do. Items not yet addressed include:

  • Allocation of expenses among unrelated trade or businesses and between exempt and non-exempt activities.
  • The ordering rules for applying charitable deductions and NOLs.
  • Net operating losses as changed under the CARES Act.

The IRS is requesting comments on numerous key situations. Until the regulations are finalized, organizations can rely on either these proposed regulations, Notice 2018-67, or a reasonable good-faith interpretation of Code Sections 511-514 considering all the facts and circumstances.
We will keep you informed with the latest developments.

If you have any questions, please contact the not-for-profit consulting team

Related Services

Related Professionals

Principals

BerryDunn experts and consultants

Did you know that there was more than a 40% increase (from $4.3 billion to $6.0 billion) in civil penalties assessed by the IRS regarding employment tax, for the 2016 fiscal year?

A recent report from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration calls for more cases to involve criminal investigation by the Department of Justice. This is significant because the requirements needed to prove a civil violation under Sec. 6672 are nearly identical to the requirements of a criminal violation under Sec. 7202, and a criminal violation can result, among other penalties, in imprisonment for up to five years.

The issue of employment taxes encompasses all businesses, even tax-exempt entities. For fiscal year 2016, employment tax issues were involved in over 26% of audits of exempt organizations. One main reason why employment tax is a major issue? Its role in funding our government: employment taxes make up $2.3 trillion dollars (70%) of the $3.3 trillion dollars collected by the IRS for fiscal year 2016.

And noncompliance is a major issue, with roughly $45.6 billion of unemployment taxes, interest and penalties still owed to the IRS as of December 2015. This trend of increasing noncompliance, combined with the vital role employment taxes has in funding our government helps explain why the IRS has increased focus and enforcement in this area.

Should your independent contractor truly be an employee? Did you properly report fringe benefits as taxable income to the individuals who received them? Knowing the answers to these questions can help you stay in compliance with the law. If you have any questions about your employment tax situation, or how we can help you ensure compliance on this and other tax issues, please contact your BerryDunn tax advisor.
 

Article
The IRS cares about employment tax—why you should too.

Many of my hospital clients have an increased incidence of providing temporary housing for locums, temps and some employees and, as a result, have questions regarding the proper tax reporting to these individuals.   

First things first: the employment status of the individual needs to be determined before anything else.

If the person is an independent contractor (for example, a locum paid through an agency), a Form 1099-Misc usually needs to be filed for payments made to the individual (or agency) of $600 or more. A 1099-Misc is not required in the following circumstances:

  • The payment is made to a corporation or a tax-exempt organization.
  • Payments for travel reimbursement are excluded as long as they are paid under an accountable plan (which itself can be another topic for a blog). For example, an independent contractor submits a timely expense report to you with their lodging receipts for reimbursement. The amounts for the expense reimbursement do not have to be included on the 1099-Misc. If you pay the travel expenses directly or provide the housing, you also do not have to include these payments on the 1099-Misc.

If the individual is an employee, you should follow the guidance in IRS Publication 15-B, which can be found on www.irs.gov.

The basic rule of thumb is that every fringe benefit provided to an employee is a taxable benefit unless there is an exclusion listed in Publication 15-B.

The lodging exclusion begins on page 15 (of the 2016 publication), and there is an example regarding a hospital listed near the bottom of that page in the left column. For lodging to meet the exclusion, it must pass three tests:

  1. The lodging must be furnished on your business premises. I’ve seen some guidance that allowed the exclusion when the lodging was in close proximity to the business premise (within a mile, etc.).
     
  2. The lodging is furnished for the employer’s convenience. The employer furnishing the lodging to the employee must have a substantial business reason for doing so other than to provide the employee with additional pay. For example, the employee is on call for emergencies 4 or 5 days a week, so must live in close proximity to the hospital.
     
  3. The employee must accept the lodging as a condition of employment. The employer must require the employee to accept the lodging because they need to live on your business premises to be able to properly perform their duties. We recommend including this condition of employment directly in the employee’s written employment contract.

If lodging does not meet all three of these tests, then it must be treated as a taxable fringe benefit with the appropriate payroll taxes withheld from the employee’s pay.

If you are also providing meals, the discussion on employer-provided meals also begins on page 15 of Publication 15-B, with the discussion for meals provided on your business premises starting on page 16.

A discussion related to transportation benefits begins on page 18. We have also had some questions from clients regarding transportation. For example, one client had an employee who dropped down to part-time status and moved from Maine to Florida. The employee agreed to continue working at the hospital one week a month, and the hospital agreed to pay for the flight back and forth. The individual continued to be treated as an employee. The flight is the employee’s commuting expense, and there is no exclusion for reimbursement of commuting expenses. Therefore, the flights had to be included in the employee’s compensation and reported on his W-2.

Many of these taxable benefits are being paid through an accounts payable system rather than payroll, and so can be easily missed. Withholding for these benefits at each pay period is much easier to accomplish rather than all at once at year end. It’s important for your HR department to communicate with the payroll office whenever unusual employment terms and benefits are being offered to employees to ensure proper tax treatment.

Article
When it comes to temporary housing for hospital employees, IRS publication 15-B can be your friend

Read this if you are working with an auditor.

The standard report an auditor issues on an entity’s financial statements was created in 1988, and has only had minor tweaking since. Amazing when we think about how the world has changed since 1988! Back then:

  • The World Wide Web hadn’t been invented
  • The Simpsons wasn’t yet on TV, and neither was Seinfeld
  • The Berlin Wall was still standing
  • The Single Audit Act celebrated its fourth birthday

The Auditing Standards Board (ASB), an independent board of the American Institute of CPAs (AICPA) that establishes auditing rules for not-for-profit organizations (as well as private company and federal, state, and local governmental entities) has decided it was high time to revisit the auditor’s report, and update it to provide additional information about the audit process that stakeholders have been requesting.

In addition to serving as BerryDunn’s quality assurance principal for the past 23 years, I’ve been serving on the ASB since January 2017, and as chair since May 2020. (And thanks to the pandemic our meetings during my tenure as chair have been conducted from my dining room table.)  We thought you might be interested in a high-level overview of the coming changes to the auditor’s report, which will be effective starting with calendar 2021 audits, from an insider’s perspective.

So what’s changing?

The most significant changes you’ll be seeing, based on feedback from various users of auditor’s reports, are:

  1. Opinion first
    The opinion in an audit report is the auditor’s conclusion as to whether the financial statements are in accordance with the applicable accounting standards, in all material respects. People told us this is the most important part of the report, so we’ve moved it to the first section of the report.
  2. Auditor’s ethical responsibilities
    We’ve pointed out that an auditor is required to be independent of the organization being audited, and to meet certain other ethical responsibilities in the conduct of the audit.
  3. “Going concern” responsibilities
    We describe management’s responsibility, under U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, and the auditor’s responsibility, under the auditing rules, for determining whether “substantial doubt” exists about the organization’s ability to continue in existence for at least one year following the date the financial statements are approved for issuance.
  4. Emphasis on professional judgment and professional skepticism
    We explain how an audit requires the auditor to exercise professional judgment (for example, regarding how much testing to perform), and to maintain professional skepticism, i.e., a questioning mind that is alert to the possibility the financial statements may be materially misstated, whether due to error or fraud.
  5. Communications with the board of directors
    We point out that the auditor is required to communicate certain matters to the board, such as difficulties encountered during the audit, material adjustments identified during the audit process, and which areas the auditor treated as “significant risks” in planning and performing the audit.
  6. Responsibility related to the “annual report”
    If the organization issues an “annual report” containing or referring to the audited financial statements, we explain the auditor is required to review it for consistency with the financial statements, and for any known misstatements of fact.
  7. Discussion of “key audit matters”
    While not required, your organization may request the auditor to discuss how certain “key audit matters” (those most significant to the audit) were addressed as part of the audit process. These are similar to the “critical audit matters” publicly traded company auditor’s reports are now required to include.

Yes, this means the auditor’s report will be longer; however, stakeholders told us inclusion of this information will make it more informative, and useful, for them.

Uniform Guidance standards also changing

Is your organization required to have a compliance audit under the federal Uniform Guidance standards? That report is also changing to reflect the items listed above to the extent they’re relevant.

What should you do?

Some actions to consider as you get ready for the first audit to which the new report applies (calendar 2021, or fiscal years ending in 2022) include:

  1. Ask your auditor what your organization’s auditor’s report will look like
    Your auditor can provide examples of auditor’s reports under the new rules, or even draft a pro forma auditor’s report for your organization (subject, of course, to the results of the audit).
  2. Outline and communicate your process for developing your annual report
    If your organization prepares an annual report, it will be important to coordinate its timing with that of the issuance of the auditor’s report, due to the auditor’s new reporting responsibility related to the annual report.
  3. Discuss with your board whether you would like the auditor to include a discussion of “key audit matters” in the auditor’s report
    While not required for not-for-profits, some organizations may decide to request the auditor include a discussion of such matters in the report, from the standpoint of transparency “best practices.”

If you have any questions about the new auditor’s report or your specific situation, please contact us. We’re here to help.
 

Article
A new auditor's report: Seven changes to know

Read this if your company does business in the EU.

Major changes are coming to the EU VAT laws on the online supply of goods and services. The rules, which apply as from July 1, 2021, will affect U.S.-based businesses selling or facilitating sales to private individuals in EU member states. With just over a month remaining before the rules become effective, such businesses should begin immediately to prepare for their new VAT registration and collection responsibilities.

What are the new EU VAT rules?

The EU VAT rules applicable to cross-border B2C e-commerce activities are undergoing a major “refresh”—or modernization—as from July 1, 2021 (postponed six months from the originally planned effective date of January 1, 2021). From July, updated VAT rules will apply to online sales (including online marketplaces) to EU private consumers and to the import of low value goods. (The European Commission published explanatory notes on the rules on September 20, 2020, which include clarifications, FAQs and examples.)

The objectives of the new EU VAT rules are to: (i) simplify compliance obligations for vendors that potentially have to comply with the VAT rules in the 27 EU member states; (ii) increase VAT revenue for the individual member states by bringing more transactions within the scope of the EU VAT net; and (iii) reduce VAT fraud.

Any business making or facilitating online sales or deliveries of goods to consumers in the EU will likely be impacted in some way by the changes.

The EU VAT law changes are as follows:

Intra-EU sales to consumers

All B2C sales of goods will be taxed in the country of destination, meaning that sellers will need to collect VAT in the EU member state to which the goods are shipped.

The existing thresholds for distance sales in the EU will be abolished and replaced by an EU-wide registration threshold of €10,000 (approximately $12,000). This is an important change and potentially could create considerable EU VAT registration and reporting obligations for U.S.-based businesses selling goods from warehouses located in the EU if not proactively addressed.

To reduce the administrative burden and simplify VAT reporting, a new reporting system, called the One-Stop Shop (OSS) will be expanded to include the distance sale of goods. U.S. businesses can register for the OSS scheme in the EU member state of dispatch and can report and remit the VAT due via a pan-EU VAT return instead of having to VAT register in each EU member state.

Sales via online marketplaces

In certain circumstances, businesses that operate an online marketplace, known as an “electronic interface” in the EU) or that facilitate the sale of third-party goods through an online marketplace will be considered the “deemed supplier” of the goods sold to EU customers and will be required to collect and pay VAT on such sales. As a result, businesses that sell via online marketplaces (e.g., Amazon, eBay, etc.) will not be required to account for VAT on such sales. 
Imports of low value goods

The VAT exemption for “low-value imports,” i.e., goods coming from outside the EU that do not exceed a value of €22 (approximately $26) will be abolished. Instead, the sale of low-value goods not exceeding €150 (approximately $180) to consumers in the EU through the business’ own website will be subject to VAT at the applicable rate in the destination country. The VAT due on low value goods can either be collected at the point of sale by the seller or collected from the consumer before the goods are released by the customer broker/delivery service. Where the seller opts to collect VAT at the point of sale, it can VAT register under the new Import One-Stop Shop (IOSS) system to account for and remit the VAT due.

VAT registration under the IOSS has several benefits, including:

  • Transparency to consumers: The customer will not be faced with any unexpected VAT costs since the total amount paid for the goods is VAT-inclusive;
  • Reduced compliance burden: Sellers can use a single IOSS registration to report and pay the VAT due on all sales covered by IOSS. Otherwise, if the seller acts as the importer (e.g., sells goods under delivered duty paid terms), it may need to register for VAT in multiple EU member states;
  • Quick customs clearance: IOSS is designed to enable goods to be cleared through customs quickly as no VAT is due at the time of importation, thus facilitating the speedy delivery of goods; and
  • Flexible logistics: IOSS simplifies logistics since goods can be imported into the EU in any EU member state. If IOSS is not used, goods can only be imported and cleared for customs in the destination EU member state, which may result in delays and additional costs.

How will the changes impact nonresident sellers?

As noted above, the EU rule changes will significantly affect U.S.-based businesses selling or facilitating the sale of goods and services online to consumers located in the EU. With just over a month left before the rules become effective, any U.S.-based business that may be impacted should take immediate steps to:

  • Understand the EU rules and how they will apply;
  • Assess the impact of the rules on supply chains;
  • Consider the impact on pricing due to different VAT rates applying in different jurisdictions;
  • Identify any adjustments that can be made (where possible) to mitigate the impact of the rules;
  • Be prepared to comply with new VAT obligations, including additional registrations, charging and collecting VAT, filing tax and/or information returns, etc.;
  • Update and adapt accounting and billing systems and master data records to identify when VAT should be applied and the appropriate rates in multiple jurisdictions; and
  • Cancel existing EU VAT registrations for distance sales that may be replaced by the OSS registration.

Failure to comply with the rules could result in the imposition of interest and penalties on the historic VAT liability. In addition to the EU VAT consequences, business selling goods that are imported into these jurisdictions must also take into account any customs implications because any compliance deficiencies could result in imported goods being delayed in customs, causing customers to be frustrated by shipping delays.

For questions about your specific situation, please contact the International Tax team. We’re here to help. 

Article
New VAT rules in the EU: What U.S. e-commerce businesses need to know 

Read this if your company does business in Canada. 

Major changes are coming to Canada’s Goods and Services Tax/Harmonized Services Tax (GST/HST) on the online supply of goods and services. The rules, which apply as from July 1, 2021, will affect U.S.-based businesses selling or facilitating sales to private individuals in Canada. With just over a month remaining before the rules become effective, such businesses should begin immediately to prepare for their new GST/HST registration and collection responsibilities.

What are the GST/HST changes in Canada?

Currently, only nonresidents that carry on business in Canada are generally required to register for and collect GST/HST (levied at the federal level in Canada) on taxable supplies of goods and services made in Canada. If the nonresident does not conduct business in Canada, it need not register for or collect GST/HST.

The impending rules aim to level the playing field between Canadian businesses (which must charge GST/HST on the supply of goods and services) and foreign suppliers by ensuring that GST/HST applies to all goods and services used in Canada, regardless of how they are supplied or whether the supplier is Canadian or nonresident. The rules will significantly impact nonresident vendors and online platform operators, in that foreign businesses will be required to register for GST/HST, collect GST/HST from customers, and report and remit tax to the Canadian tax authorities. Three types of supplies by foreign businesses will be affected:

  • Supplies of digital services
  • Supplies of accommodation made through an accommodation platform (AP)
  • Online supplies of goods through a fulfilment warehouse

Digital services

Foreign businesses and platforms that do not have a physical place of business in Canada but that supply goods and services online to Canadian consumers and/or non-GST/HST-registered businesses (i.e., B2C transactions) will be required to register for GST/HST, resulting in an obligation to collect, remit and report tax. The tax rate will be the rate applicable in the province where the consumer is resident.

Nonresident businesses will have to register for GST/HST purposes when their sales exceed CAD 30,000 (approximately USD 25,000) over a 12-month period or they may register voluntarily where the threshold is not exceeded. A simplified online registration will be available for these businesses, but it will not be possible for the nonresident business to reclaim GST/HST incurred on its own purchases. If nonresident businesses wish to recover GST/HST paid on business expenses, they may be able to register under the regular GST/HST regime.

Accommodation platforms

An AP is a digital platform that facilitates the supply of short-term rental accommodations (i.e., rentals for less than one month) to private customers for a price of at least of CAD 20 (approximately USD 16) per day (e.g., Airbnb, VRBO, etc.).

Nonresident APs will be required to register for GST/HST, and to collect, remit and report tax on the rental charges in cases where the owner of the property is not GST/HST-registered. Where the property owner is GST/HST registered, the AP will not be responsible for GST/HST; instead, the property owner will be required to collect/remit GST/HST on the rental charges. The GST/HST rate will be the rate applicable in the province where the property is located.

APs subject to these changes should register for GST/HST under the simplified online registration.

Fulfilment warehouses and websites

GST/HST registration will be required for the following types of transactions in cases where the nonresident business’ sales to consumers exceed, or are expected to exceed, CAD 30,000 over a 12-month period:

  • Direct sales of goods by a nonresident business directly (i.e., not via a distribution platform) through its website to Canadian consumers: In this case, the nonresident business will have to register, charge and account for GST/HST. 
  • Sales of goods by a nonresident business through a distribution platform to consumers in Canada: The distribution platform operator will be required to register for GST/HST and account for GST/HST in Canada. It should be noted that no GST/HST will be due on the service fee charged by the distribution platform operator to nonresident businesses.
  • Online sales of goods by a nonresident business (but not through a distribution platform) to customers, where the goods are located in a Canadian fulfilment warehouse: The nonresident business will be required to register for GST/HST and will need to keep records on its foreign vendors and submit these to the Canadian tax authorities. These information returns will give the tax authorities insight into which nonresident businesses need to be GST/HST-registered.

Nonresident businesses that carry out the above transactions will have to register under the standard GST/HST rules rather than under the new simplified regime and will generally be able to reclaim GST/HST incurred on their purchases.

Potential Provincial Sales Tax (PST) implications

In addition to having GST/HST registration and collection obligations, nonresident vendors also may be required to register for PST. Currently, British Columbia, Manitoba, Quebec, and Saskatchewan impose a PST, and three of these provinces (i.e., British Colombia, Quebec, and Saskatchewan) have introduced rules requiring nonresident vendors selling to customers in these provinces to register for PST purposes. The rules vary by province and will need to be considered in addition to the new GST/HST rules.

How will the changes impact nonresident sellers?

As noted above, the Canadian rule changes will significantly affect U.S.-based businesses selling or facilitating the sale of goods and services online to consumers located in Canada. With just over a month left before the rules become effective, any U.S.-based business that may be impacted should take immediate steps to:

  • Understand the Canadian rules and how they will apply;
  • Assess the impact of the rules on supply chains;
  • Consider the impact on pricing due to the GST/HST and the varying PST rates applied in in the aforementioned provinces;
  • Identify any adjustments that can be made (where possible) to mitigate the impact of the rules;
  • Be prepared to comply with new GST/HST obligations, including additional registrations, charging and collecting GST/HST, filing tax and/or information returns, etc.; and
  • Update and adapt accounting and billing systems and master data records to identify when GST/HST should be applied and the appropriate rates in multiple jurisdictions.

Failure to comply with the rules could result in the imposition of interest and penalties on the historic GST/HST liability. In addition to the GST/HST implications in Canada, business selling goods that are imported into these jurisdictions must also take into account any customs implications because any compliance deficiencies could result in imported goods being delayed in customs, causing customers to be frustrated by shipping delays.

For questions about your specific situation, please contact the International Tax team. We’re here to help. 

Article
New GST/HST rules in Canada: What U.S. e-commerce businesses need to know  

Read this if you are a plan sponsor of employee benefit plans.

This article is the sixth in a series to help employee benefit plan fiduciaries better understand their responsibilities and manage the risks of non-compliance with Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) requirements. You can read the previous articles here.

Plan sponsors have a fiduciary responsibility to provide oversight over the operations of employee benefit plans. This oversight involves a multitude of varying responsibilities. Failure to provide sufficient oversight can lead to non-compliance with rules and regulations. However, even if plan sponsors are providing sufficient oversight, lack of documentation of the oversight is arguably equally as severe as no oversight at all. Here are some common fiduciary responsibilities and how you should document them. 

Review of the report on service organization’s controls

Most employee benefit plans have outsourced a significant portion of the plan’s processes, and the internal controls surrounding those processes, to a service organization. Regardless of how certain plan-related processes are performed—internally or outsourced—the plan sponsor has a fiduciary responsibility to monitor the internal controls in place surrounding significant processes and to determine if these controls are suitably designed and effective. The most commonly outsourced processes of an employee benefit plan are the administration, including recordkeeping of the plan, through a third-party administrator; payroll processing; and actuarial calculations, if applicable to the plan.

When plan processes are outsourced to service organizations, generally the most efficient way to obtain an understanding of the outsourced controls is to obtain a report on controls issued by the service organization’s auditor. You should request the service organization’s latest System and Organization Controls Report (SOC 1 report). The SOC 1 report should be based on the Statement on Standards for Attestation Engagements No. 18, Reporting on the Controls at a Service Organization, frequently known as SSAE 18.

Plan sponsors should perform a documented review of the SOC 1 report for each of the plan’s service organizations. The documented review should most notably include discussion of any exceptions noted within the service auditor’s testing performed, identification of subservice organizations and consideration if subservice organization SOC 1 reports need to be obtained, and assessment of the complementary user entity controls outlined in the SOC 1 report. The complementary user entity controls are internal control activities that should be in place at the plan sponsor to provide reasonable assurance that the controls tested at the service organization provide the necessary level of internal control over the plan’s financial statements. Contact a BerryDunn professional to obtain our SOC report review template to assist in documenting your review.

Documentation of the plan within minutes

To provide general plan oversight, plan sponsors should have a group charged with the governance of the plan. This group should meet on a routine basis to review various aspects of the plan’s operations. Minutes of these meetings should contain evidence that certain matters that would be of interest to the Department of Labor (DOL) were discussed.

We recommend minutes of meetings document the following:

  • Investment performance—The plan sponsor has a fiduciary responsibility to ensure the investments offered by the plan are meeting certain performance expectations. Investment statements and the plan’s investment policy should be reviewed on a regular basis with documentation of this review retained in minutes of meetings. Any conclusions reached about the need to change investments or put an investment on a “watch-list” should also be documented in the minutes, including any additional steps that need to be taken.
  • SOC 1 report review—As noted above, the plan sponsor has a fiduciary duty to ensure all third-party service organizations utilized by the plan have suitably designed and effective internal controls. Plan sponsors should perform a documented review of the SOC 1 report for each of the plan’s service organizations. The results of these reviews should then be reported at plan oversight meetings with any subsequent actions or conclusions documented in the minutes to these meetings.
  • Reasonableness of fees—The DOL requires plan fiduciaries to determine if the fees charged under covered service provider agreements are reasonable in relation to the services provided. To determine the reasonableness of fees, the plan may (1) hire a consultant, (2) monitor industry trends regarding fees, (3) consult with peer companies, (4) use a benchmarking service, or (5) conduct a request for proposal. Failure to determine the reasonableness of the fees charged can result in a prohibited transaction. When doing such a review, the fiduciaries of the plan should document in the minutes the steps taken and conclusions reached.
  • Overall review of the plan—Plan sponsors have a fiduciary responsibility to review the activity of the plan as well as participant balances. We recommend plan sponsors implement and document monitoring procedures over the activities of the plan and participant balances. This review could be incorporated into documented self-testing procedures, by haphazardly selecting a sample of participants each quarter and reviewing their account activity and participant balances. The results of such self-testing should then be reported at plan oversight meetings with any subsequent actions or conclusions documented in the minutes to these meetings. Reach out to a BerryDunn professional to obtain our participant change review workbook to assist in performing this self-testing.

Retention of salary reduction agreements

During our audits of employee benefit plans, we often note that employee deferrals are not consistently supported by salary reduction agreements or other forms maintained in employees’ personnel files. Many third-party administrators allow participants to make changes to their elective deferral rates directly through the third-party administrators without the involvement of the plan sponsor.

We often recommend that you maintain all changes to employee elective deferral rates in employees’ personnel files using salary reduction agreements. We also recommend that employees’ elections to not participate in the plan be documented in their personnel file. If employees can elect to change their deferral rates directly with the third-party administrator, we typically recommend that management print support from the third-party administrator’s online portal as documentation to support the change in the employee’s deferral rate and retain this support in the employees’ personnel file. However, if the third-party administrator’s online portal provides adequate history of deferral election changes, the plan sponsor may be able to rely on this portal for documentation retention. In these instances, the plan auditor should request a deferral feedback report directly from the third-party administrator.  

Monitoring of inactive accounts

Inactive accounts should be monitored by the plan sponsor for unusual activity or excessive fees that may be posted to these accounts. To the extent that inactive accounts have not exceeded $5,000, consideration should be given to cashing out the accounts if allowed by the plan document. Plan sponsors should, on a periodic basis, review the accounts of inactive participants or those who have been separated from service to ascertain whether the changes and charges to those accounts appear reasonable.

Plan sponsors have many documentation responsibilities. This list is not meant to be all-inclusive. And, the facts and circumstances of each employee benefit plan will change the applicability of these items. However, this list should be used as a tool to help plan sponsors perform a deep dive of their current plan documentation processes. And, hopefully, a result of this deep dive will be a robust documentation process that deliberately documents all major decisions and review functions related to the plan.

Article
Plan documentation: Another key to successful oversight

Read this if your facility or organization has received Provider Relief Funds.

The rules over the use of the HHS Provider Relief Funds (PRF) have been in a constant state of flux and interpretation since the funds started to show up in your bank accounts back in April. Here is a summary of where we are as of June 14, 2021 on HHS’ reporting requirements. Key highlights:

These requirements apply to:

  • PRF General and Targeted Distributions
  • the Skilled Nursing Facilities (SNF) and Nursing Home Infection Control Distribution
  • and exclude:
    • the Rural Health Clinic COVID-19 Testing Program
    • claims reimbursements from HRSA COVID-19 Uninsured Program and the HRSA COVID-19 Coverage Assistance Fund (CAF)

This notice supersedes the January 15, 2021 reporting requirements.
Deadline for Use of Funds:

Payment Received Period

Deadline to Use Funds

Reporting Time Period

Period 1

4/10/20-6/30/20

6/30/21

7/1/21-9/30/21

Period 2

7/1/20-12/31/20

12/31/21

1/1/22-3/31/22

Period 3

1/1/21-6/30/21

6/30/22

7/1/22-9/30/22

Period 4

7/1/21-12/31/21

12/31/22

1/1/21-3/31/23

Recipients who received one or more payments exceeding $10,000 in the aggregate during each Payment Received Period above (rather than the previous $10,000 cumulative across all PRF payments) are subject to the above reporting requirements 

Responsibility for reporting:

  • The Reporting Entity is the entity that registers its Tax Identification Number (TIN) and reports payments received by that TIN and its subsidiary TINs.
  • For Targeted Distributions, the Reporting Entity is always the original recipient; a parent entity cannot report on the subsidiary’s behalf and regardless of transfer of payment.

Steps for reporting use of funds:

  1. Interest earned on PRF payments
  2. Other assistance received
  3. Use of SNF and Nursing Home Control Distribution Payments if applicable (any interest earned reported here instead), with expenses by CY quarter
  4. Use of General and Other Targeted Distribution Payments, with expenses by CY quarter
  5. Net unreimbursed expenses attributable to Coronavirus, net after other assistance and PRF payments by quarter
  6. Lost revenues reimbursement (not applicable to PRF recipients that received only SNF and Nursing Home Infection Control Distribution payments)

PORTAL WILL OPEN ON JULY 1, 2021!

Access the full update from HHS: Provider Post-Payment Notice of Reporting Requirements.

Article
Provider Relief Funds: HHS Post-Payment Notice of Reporting Requirements

Read this if you are a business owner.

As state and local governments look for new ways to stimulate their economies, incentivize employment and keep businesses afloat, the pressure for states to generate additional tax revenue continues. In response to this pressure, states are revisiting taxpayers’ compliance with their “nexus” rules and other tax policies and considering new taxes on digital services. In addition, many state governments are reconsidering the extent to which they are willing to conform to federal tax rules and legislation.

Taxpayers need to be aware of the tax rules in the states in which they operate. Taxpayers that cross state borders—even virtually—should review state nexus and other policies to understand their compliance obligations, identify ways to minimize their state tax liabilities, and eliminate any state tax exposure. The following are some of the state tax issues taxpayers should monitor and plan for in 2021:

  1. Passthrough entity (PTE) income tax elections
    It looks like the federal $10,000 “SALT cap” is sticking around, and more states are enacting a workaround in response. A growing number of states are allowing partnerships and S corporations to elect to be taxed at the entity level to help their resident owners get around the SALT cap. However, it is important that individuals understand the broad, long-term implications of the PTE tax election. Care needs to be exercised to avoid state tax traps, especially for nonresidents, that could exceed any federal tax savings.
  2. Impacts of federal income tax changes
    Federal tax legislation also has impact at the state level. While many states quickly settle on approaches to conform with or decouple from the federal legislation, other states have done nothing, leaving taxpayers to file state income tax returns with very little guidance on how or whether the federal changes apply.

    Now that tax years impacted by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act are well into their audit cycles, state taxpayers that unknowingly did not correctly take federal changes into account when calculating their state taxes may be confronted by not only audit exposure, but in some cases refund opportunities. Taxpayers should review their state tax returns to identify opportunities to minimize exposure and identify refunds well in advance of state tax audits.
  3. Taxes on digital advertising services
    Maryland was the first state to enact a digital advertising services tax. Large tech companies immediately sued the state, and in response the legislature passed a bill to delay the implementation of the controversial tax until 2022. To date, several other states have introduced similar digital advertising taxes, and some states are proposing to include these services in their sales tax base. States will be closely following the litigation in Maryland as they consider their own legislation.

    The definition of digital advertising services can potentially be very broad and fact specific. Taxpayers should understand the various state proposals and plan for their potential impact.
  4. Sales and use tax nexus: Remote sellers and marketplaces
    Florida and Kansas have finally joined the ranks of states with a bright-line economic nexus threshold for remote retailers and marketplace providers. At this point, the only state without a bright-line standard or marketplace rules is Missouri.

However, retailers should not forget about physical presence. Even though most states have implemented economic nexus rules since Wayfair, the traditional physical presence rules are still alive and well. States are continuing to assess retailers that, sometimes unknowingly, have some form of physical presence in the state.

E-retailers should be sure they are in compliance with state sales and use tax laws and marketplace facilitator rules and have considered all planning opportunities. 

How we can help

We are experienced in income, franchise, gross receipts, sales and use, as well as credits and incentives. We can help taxpayers monitor state tax laws and nexus requirements, understand where they have state obligations and how to minimize them, identify and implement planning opportunities, identify and quantify tax exposures, and assist with state tax audits. 

For questions about your specific situation, please contact the State and Local Tax team. We’re here to help. 
 

Article
SALT watch: Four issues to consider in 2021