All posts by admin

ASU 2023-09: Amendment to Income Tax Disclosure

The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Accounting Standards Update 2023-09 (the “Update”) to enhance the transparency and decision usefulness of income tax disclosures.  The amendments in this Update address investor requests for more transparency about income tax information through improvements to income tax disclosures primarily related to the rate reconciliation and income taxes paid information.  This Update also includes certain other amendments to improve the effectiveness of income tax disclosures.

Effective Date

For public business entities, the Update is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2024.  For all others, the Update is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2025.  Early adoption is permitted, and the Update shall be applied on a prospective basis.  Retrospective application is permitted.

Rate Reconciliation

Public business entities must disclose a tabular reconciliation using both percentages and amounts, broken out into specific categories with certain reconciling items at or above 5% of the expected tax further broken out by nature and/or jurisdiction.

All other entities must provide qualitatively disclosure of the nature and effect of significant reconciling items by specific categories and individual jurisdictions.

Income Taxes Paid

Both public business entities and all other entities must disclose income taxes paid (net of refunds received), broken out between federal (national), state/local and foreign. Disclose the income taxes paid (net of refunds received) to an individual jurisdiction when 5% or more of the total income taxes paid (net of refunds received).

Other Disaggregated Disclosures

Both public business entities and all other entities must provide Income (or loss) from continuing operations before income taxes, broken out between domestic and foreign, and Income tax expense (or benefit) from continuing operations, broken out between federal (national), state/local and foreign.

Removed Disclosures

The Update removes disclosure requirements for all entities related to: reasonably possible significant changes in the total amount of unrecognized tax benefits within 12 months of the reporting date; and the cumulative amount of each type of temporary difference for which a deferred tax liability has not been recognized (due to the exception to recognizing deferred taxes related to subsidiaries and corporate joint ventures).

Detail of the Update can be found in the attached ASU 2023-09.

ASU 2023-09

THE PILED-UP INVENTORIES MAY BE WORTH MORE THAN YOU THINK! (KOREAN VERSION)

과도한 재고를 보유하고 있는 사업체는 재고를 자선 단체에 기부함으로써 미국 IRS Section 170(e)(3)조에 따라 연방 소득 공제 혜택을 받을 수 있다.  이 공제는 일반적인 C 법인이 기부한 재고의 원가와 원가와 공정시장가치 간의 차이의 절반을 더한 금액을 차감할 수 있도록 허용한다. 최대 공제 받을 수 있는 금액은 재고원가의 두 배이다. 다른 유형의 기업인 S 법인,  파트너십,  LLC,  개인 사업자 등도 바로 비용 공제를 받을 수 있다.

창고에 쌓여있는 재고를 기부하는 것은 창고 공간을 확보하고, Just-in-Time 재고 수준을 달성하는 데 도움이 되며, 기업들은 판매량이 많은 상품에 효과적으로 마케팅 할 수 있다. 또한 과다한 재고를 처분하는 어려움을 피하고 비영리 단체의 혜택을 누릴수도 있다.

위에서 언급한 바와 같이, C 법인은 아픈 사람, 도움이 필요한 사람 또는 영유아를 위해 재고를 기부할 때 더 큰 공제를 받을 수 있다. 이 공제는 기부된 재고의 비용과 해당 공정시장가치에서 판매될 경우 발생했을 이익의 절반을 더한 금액을 기준으로 한다. 그러나 청구된 공제액은 제170(e)(3)조에 따라 상품 가치의 두 배를 초과할 수 없다.

170(f)(11)(A)(ii)항은 다른 자산들과는 달리, 재고는 일반적으로 납세자에 의해 매년 평가되기 때문에 기부된 재고의 대해 가치평가를 요구하지 않는다. 자선단체에 기부된 재고의 공정시장가치(FMV)는 기부자가 기부 당시의 사실과 상황에 기반으로 문서화해야 한다.

공제액이 500달러 이상인 재고자산을 자선기부 하는 경우, 국세청은 납세자가 소득세 신고서와 함께 비현금성 자선 기부 양식인 Form 8283을 제출하도록 요구한다. 납세자가 5,000달러 미만의공제를 청구하는 기부금에 대해서는 Section A를 작성하고, 5,000달러 이상의 공제를 청구하는 기부금에 대해서는 Section B를 작성해야 한다. 공제액이 $5,000을 초과하는 경우, 수취인의 공인 대리인은 재고자산 수령을 인정하는 Form 8283에 서명해야 한다. 또한, 재고에 대한 공제액을 계산한 명세서를 첨부해야 한다.

향산된 재고 기부 공제는 C법인에 적용 가능하며, 위에서 논의한 자선 기부 목적을 위해 자선 단체가 이용할 수 있는 소비자 제품을 제공할 수있는 회사에 더 적합하다.

The Piled-up Inventories May Be Worth More Than You Think! (English Version)

Businesses with excess, non-moving inventory can benefit by donating it to charity, as they can earn a federal income tax deduction under Section 170(e)(3) of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. This deduction allows regular C corporations to deduct the cost of the donated inventory, plus half the difference between the cost and fair market value, up to twice the cost. Other types of businesses, such as S corporations, partnerships, LLCs, and sole proprietorships, can qualify for a straight cost deduction.

Donating stagnant inventory offers several advantages, including freeing up warehouse space, helping achieve Just-in-Time inventory levels, and allowing businesses to focus their marketing efforts on top-selling items. It also helps avoid the challenges of liquidating excess inventory and benefits deserving nonprofit organizations.

As mentioned above, a C corporation may qualify for an enhanced deduction when donating inventory for the care of the ill, needy, or infants. This deduction is based on the cost of the donated inventory plus half the gross profit it would have generated if sold at its fair market value.  The claimed deduction, however, may not exceed twice the basis of the property under Sec. 170(e)(3).

Unlike other property, Sec. 170(f)(11)(A)(ii) does not require an appraisal for contributions of inventory because inventory is generally valued annually by the taxpayer. The fair market value (FMV) of inventory contributed to a charity should be documented by the donor based on the facts and circumstances at the time of the contribution.

For charitable contributions of inventory with more than $500 of increased deduction, the IRS requires the taxpayer to file Form 8283, Noncash Charitable Contributions, with its income tax return. Section A of the form should be completed for contributions for which the taxpayer claims less than $5,000 of increased deduction and Section B for contributions for which the taxpayer claims more than $5,000 of increased deduction. If the increased deduction is greater than $5,000, an authorized representative of the donee should sign Form 8283 acknowledging the receipt of the property. In addition, a statement should be attached computing the amount of increased deduction for the inventory.

Note that this enhanced inventory donation deduction is available to C-corporations and is more suitable for companies carrying consumer products that are readily available to charities for the charitable purposes discussed above.

Constitutionality of the Section 965 “Toll Tax”

The U.S. Supreme Court has granted certiorari for the case of Moore v. United States, in which the petitioner seeks to challenge the constitutionality of the Section 965 transition tax, commonly referred to as the "Toll Tax." The petitioner argues that the Toll Tax, enacted as part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, violates the 16th Amendment by being a direct tax on unrealized income. Despite previous rejections of their case in lower courts, the Supreme Court's decision to hear it has raised significant questions about the potential impact on tax law.

The Section 965 transition tax required U.S. shareholders to pay a one-time tax on certain untaxed foreign earnings of specified foreign corporations, with the option to pay it in eight yearly installments. If the Supreme Court rules in favor of the petitioner and invalidates this tax, taxpayers might be eligible for refunds, but only if they filed protective refund claims before their applicable refund statute of limitations expired.

For many taxpayers who paid the Section 965 tax in full, their statute of limitations may have already closed, making it administratively impossible to seek refunds. However, taxpayers who elected to pay over eight years, filed late returns, or have open years due to audits may want to consider protective refund claims to keep their statute of limitations open in case the Supreme Court's ruling favors the plaintiffs. Despite lower courts generally upholding the tax's constitutionality, the potential ramifications of a Supreme Court decision in the opposite direction make this a noteworthy issue for taxpayers with open statute of limitations.

Affected taxpayers should consult with their tax advisors regarding the pros and cons and understand the legal ramifications before making protective refund claims.