캘리포니아주는 소프트웨어 및 기술기업에 중요한 영향을 미칠 수 있는 판매세 및 사용세 제도를 개정하였다.

2026년 6월 29일 Gavin Newsom 캘리포니아 주지사는 Senate Bill 122 (“SB 122”)에 서명하였다. 이에 따라 2027년 1월 1일부터 캘리포니아 판매세 과세대상인 유형자산(Tangible Personal Property)의 범위에 일정한 “Digital Products”가 포함된다. 여기에는 전자적으로 제공되거나 원격으로 접속하여 사용하는 기성 소프트웨어(Prewritten Computer Software)도 포함된다.

이번 개정은 특히 Software-as-a-Service (“SaaS”) 기업에 중요한 변화이다. 그동안 캘리포니아 판매세가 일반적으로 적용되지 않았던 많은 SaaS 제품들이 2027년부터 과세대상이 될 수 있다.

타주 및 해외기업도 적용 가능
이번 개정은 캘리포니아 소재 기업에만 적용되는 것은 아니다. 캘리포니아의 Economic Nexus 규정에 따라 캘리포니아에 사무실이나 직원이 없는 타주 또는 해외기업이라도, 캘리포니아로의 해당 매출이 당해연도 또는 직전연도에 $500,000을 초과하는 경우 판매세 및 사용세 등록, 징수, 신고 및 납부 의무가 발생할 수 있다.

SB 122에 따라 일정한 디지털 제품도 과세대상 유형자산에 포함되므로, 미국 내 타주기업뿐만 아니라 한국을 포함한 해외 소프트웨어 기업도 캘리포니아 고객에게 소프트웨어나 SaaS를 판매하는 경우 판매세 신고 및 납부 의무가 발생할 수 있다.

모든 디지털 제품이 과세되는 것은 아님
SB 122는 모든 디지털 제품을 과세대상으로 하는 것은 아니다. 일정한 Custom Software, Digital Infrastructure, Digital Books, Digital Audio 및 Audiovisual Works, Digital Visual Works, Digital Video Games 등은 과세대상에서 제외될 수 있다.

따라서 일반적인 SaaS 제품은 과세될 수 있는 반면, 일부 Cloud Infrastructure, Custom Software 또는 기타 디지털 서비스는 과세대상에서 제외될 수 있다.

특정 제품이나 서비스가 과세대상 “Digital Product”인지, 제외되는 “Digital Infrastructure” 또는 Custom Software인지, 아니면 비과세 서비스인지 여부는 해당 기술의 구조, 고객의 사용방식 및 계약내용 등에 따라 달라질 수 있어 세부적인 검토가 필요하다.

소프트웨어 및 기술기업은 2027년 1월 1일 이전에 캘리포니아 매출이 $500,000 Economic Nexus 기준을 초과하는지, 각 제품 및 서비스가 어떻게 분류되는지, 그리고 Billing 및 Sales Tax 시스템의 변경이 필요한지 사전에 검토할 필요가 있다.

특히 Software, SaaS, Cloud Computing 및 기타 Technology 기업은 SB 122가 자사의 제품 및 Business Model에 어떻게 적용되는지 세무전문가와 사전에 검토할 것을 권고한다.

California has enacted a significant change to its sales and use tax rules affecting software and technology companies. On June 29, 2026, Governor Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill 122 ("SB 122") into law. Beginning January 1, 2027, California will expand its definition of taxable tangible personal property to include certain "digital products," including prewritten computer software delivered electronically or accessed remotely.

This is a major change for Software-as-a-Service ("SaaS") companies, as many SaaS products that historically have not been subject to California sales tax may become taxable.

Out-of-State and Foreign Companies May Be Affected
The new rules are not limited to California companies. Under California's economic nexus rules, an out-of-state retailer generally may have a sales and use tax collection obligation when its applicable sales into California exceed $500,000 during the current or preceding calendar year, even if it has no California office or employees.

Because SB 122 expands taxable tangible personal property to include qualifying digital products, both U.S. and foreign software companies selling to California customers may become subject to California sales tax compliance requirements.

Not All Digital Products Are Taxable
SB 122 contains several important exclusions, including certain custom software, digital infrastructure, digital books, digital audio and audiovisual works, digital visual works, and digital video games.

The distinction is important. A traditional SaaS product may be taxable, while certain cloud infrastructure, custom software, or other digital offerings may remain outside the new rules.
Determining whether a particular product or service constitutes a taxable "digital product," excluded "digital infrastructure," custom software, or a nontaxable service can require careful analysis of the technology and how the product is provided and used.

Software and technology companies selling to California customers should review their California sales tax position before January 1, 2027, including whether they exceed the $500,000 economic nexus threshold, how their products and services should be classified, and whether their billing and sales tax systems need to be updated.

Businesses in the software, SaaS, cloud computing, and broader technology industries should consult with their tax advisors to determine how SB 122 applies to their specific products and business models.

IRS는 최근 “No Tax on Overtime”으로 알려진 Qualified Overtime Compensation 소득공제와 관련하여 추가 지침을 발표했다. 이번 지침은 공제 대상, Qualified Overtime의 계산 방법 및 고용주의 보고 의무 등에 대해 추가적인 내용을 담고 있다.

먼저 주의할 점은 “No Tax on Overtime”이라고 해서 초과근무수당 자체가 비과세되는 것은 아니라는 것이다. 초과근무수당은 일반적으로 기존과 같이 소득세 원천징수, Social Security Tax 및 기타 Payroll Tax의 적용을 받는다. 대신 일정 요건을 충족하는 직원이 개인소득세 신고 시 Qualified Overtime Compensation에 대해 소득공제를 받을 수 있다.

고용주 입장에서 알아두어야 할 주요 내용은 다음과 같다.

· 모든 초과근무수당이 공제 대상은 아니다. 일반적으로 연방법인 Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)에 따라 지급이 요구되는 초과근무수당에 적용된다.

· 일반적으로 Overtime Premium 부분만 공제 대상이 된다. 통상적인 1.5배 초과근무수당의 경우, 초과근무 시간에 지급되는 전체 급여가 아니라 추가로 지급되는 0.5배 부분이 Qualified Overtime Compensation에 해당한다.

· 2026년부터 새로운 W-2 보고 의무가 적용된다. 고용주는 Qualified Overtime Compensation을 Form W-2, Box 12, Code TT에 별도로 보고해야 한다.

· Payroll 원천징수 방식은 기본적으로 기존과 동일하다. Qualified Overtime Compensation이라고 해서 해당 금액을 과세 급여에서 제외하거나 자동으로 원천징수를 줄이는 것은 아니다.

따라서 초과근무수당을 지급하는 고용주는 Payroll Service Provider와 확인하여 2026년 Qualified Overtime Compensation을 적절하게 구분하고 보고할 수 있도록 준비할 필요가 있다.

보다 자세한 내용과 구체적인 사례는 IRS가 발표한 **FS-2026-13, “Updates to questions and answers about the new deduction for qualified overtime compensation”**을 참고할 수 있다.

IRS – Updates to questions and answers about the new deduction for qualified overtime compensation

본 Newsletter는 일반적인 정보 제공을 목적으로 하며, 개별적인 세무, 법률 또는 Payroll 관련 자문을 제공하기 위한 것은 아니다

The IRS recently issued updated guidance regarding the new deduction for qualified overtime compensation, commonly referred to as “No Tax on Overtime.” The updated guidance provides additional clarification regarding eligibility, calculation of qualified overtime, and employer reporting requirements.

One important point is that “No Tax on Overtime” does not mean overtime wages are exempt from tax. Overtime compensation generally remains subject to income tax withholding, Social Security and other applicable employment taxes. Instead, eligible employees may claim an income tax deduction for certain qualified overtime compensation.

For employers, some key items to be aware of include:

• Not all overtime qualifies. Generally, the deduction applies to overtime compensation required under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

• Only the qualifying overtime premium generally counts. For typical time-and-a-half overtime, this generally means the additional “half-time” premium rather than the employee’s entire compensation for the overtime hours.

• New W-2 reporting begins in 2026. Employers are required to separately report qualified overtime compensation on Form W-2, Box 12, Code TT.

• Payroll withholding generally continues as usual. Employers should not automatically exclude qualified overtime from taxable wages or reduce withholding because of the deduction.

Employers should coordinate with their payroll providers to make sure their payroll systems are prepared to properly identify and report qualified overtime compensation for 2026.

For additional details and examples, please refer to the IRS’s updated guidance, FS-2026-13, “Updates to questions and answers about the new deduction for qualified overtime compensation.” Updates to questions and answers about the new deduction for qualified overtime compensation

This newsletter is intended for general informational purposes only and should not be considered tax, legal, or payroll advice.

As cryptocurrency continues to gain acceptance as an investment and treasury asset, we are seeing an increasing number of businesses holding digital assets such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, and other cryptocurrencies. Whether acquired as a long-term investment, accepted as payment from customers, or held as part of a treasury management strategy, these assets can present unique financial reporting and income tax considerations.

Under ASC 350-60, Crypto Assets, qualifying crypto assets are measured at fair value, with changes in fair value recognized in net income at each reporting date.

This accounting model replaced the former impairment-only approach that often understated the economic value of crypto holdings on the balance sheet.

In addition to fair value measurement, companies are required to provide expanded financial statement disclosures, including information regarding:

• Significant cryptocurrency holdings
• Cost basis and fair value
• Number of units held
• Annual rollforwards of crypto activity
• Gains and losses recognized during the reporting period
• Contractual sale restrictions, when applicable

Not Every Digital Asset Qualifies
The guidance generally applies to cryptocurrencies that:
• qualify as intangible assets;
• reside on a blockchain or similar distributed ledger;
• are secured through cryptography;
• are fungible;
• do not provide enforceable rights to underlying goods or services; and
• are not issued by the reporting entity or its affiliates.

Accordingly, many commonly held cryptocurrencies—including Bitcoin and Ethereum—fall within the scope of ASC 350-60, while certain other digital assets, such as some stablecoins, tokenized assets, and non-fungible tokens (NFTs), may be subject to different accounting guidance.

Book Accounting vs. Tax Accounting
Although U.S. GAAP requires qualifying crypto assets to be measured at fair value each reporting period, U.S. federal income tax law generally does not recognize unrealized gains or losses. Instead, taxable income generally arises only upon a realization event, such as the sale or exchange of cryptocurrency or when cryptocurrency is used to acquire goods or services or transferred as compensation for services.

Consequently, the carrying amount of cryptocurrency reported in the financial statements will often differ from its tax basis. These differences generally create temporary differences that must be accounted for under ASC 740, Income Taxes, potentially resulting in deferred tax assets or deferred tax liabilities.

U.S. GAAP vs. IFRS
Companies reporting under both U.S. GAAP and IFRS should also recognize that the accounting models are not identical.

Unlike U.S. GAAP, IFRS does not contain a cryptocurrency-specific accounting standard. Cryptocurrency is generally accounted for under IAS 38, Intangible Assets, or, in limited circumstances, IAS 2, Inventories. Under IAS 38, entities generally apply either the cost model or, if an active market exists, the revaluation model. Under the revaluation model, unrealized appreciation is generally recognized in Other Comprehensive Income (OCI) rather than profit or loss, whereas ASC 350-60 requires all fair value changes to be recognized immediately in net income. Consequently, multinational companies may report significantly different earnings and equity under U.S. GAAP and IFRS despite holding the same cryptocurrency assets.

As a result, the measurement basis, income statement impact, and financial statement presentation under IFRS may differ from those required under U.S. GAAP.

As digital assets become increasingly common in corporate treasury and investment strategies, companies should periodically evaluate whether their accounting policies and financial reporting processes remain compliant with current U.S. GAAP. This includes confirming that all qualifying crypto assets have been properly identified and accounted for under ASC 350-60, that fair value measurements are supported by reliable valuation methodologies, and that appropriate internal controls are in place over the custody and valuation of digital assets. Companies should also assess the deferred tax implications arising from book-tax differences under ASC 740 and ensure that all required financial statement disclosures are complete and accurate.

미국에 거주지를 두고 있는 많은 한국 국적자 및 한국 출신 이민자들은 한국 내 상당한 규모의 자산을 보유하고 있다. 이러한 자산에는 한국 소재 부동산, 비상장기업 지분, 한국 법인 주식, 그리고 한국 금융기관에 예치된 금융자산 등이 포함된다.

비록 미국에 정착하여 오랜 기간 거주하고 있더라도 한국 상속세 및 증여세 문제는 여전히 중요한 고려사항이 될 수 있다. 한국 자산을 보유한 상태에서 증여 또는 상속이 이루어질 경우 상당한 규모의 한국 상속세 또는 증여세가 발생할 수 있으며, 사실관계에 따라서는 한국 세법상 과세 범위가 한국 소재 자산에만 국한되지 않을 수도 있다.

한국의 상속세 및 증여세 제도는 최고 50%의 세율이 적용되는 OECD 국가 중에서도 가장 높은 수준의 이전세 제도 중 하나로 평가된다. 적절한 사전 계획이 없다면 상당한 규모의 자산이 세금으로 유출될 수 있으며, 상속인들은 세금 납부를 위한 유동성 확보에 어려움을 겪을 수 있다.

현재 미국은 개인당 1,500만 달러를 초과하는 높은 수준의 연방 상속·증여세 통합공제액을 제공하고 있다. 그러나 미국에 거주지를 둔 개인이 보유한 한국 자산은 미국과 한국의 이전세 제도 모두의 적용을 받을 수 있다. 이러한 자산은 일반적으로 미국 상속세 과세대상 재산(Gross Estate) 및 증여세 과세표준에 포함되며, 동시에 한국 상속세 또는 증여세 과세 대상이 될 수 있다. 따라서 현행 미국 공제액으로 인해 미국 상속세 부담이 거의 없거나 전혀 없더라도 상당한 규모의 한국 상속세 또는 증여세가 발생할 수 있다.

실무상 상속세 또는 증여세를 납부하기 위한 재원을 마련하기 위해 가족이 오랫동안 보유해 온 부동산이나 사업체 지분을 매각해야 하는 사례를 자주 접한다. 이러한 상황의 상당수는 적절한 사전 계획을 통해 예방하거나 상당 부분 완화할 수 있었던 경우들이다. 그러나 실제 상속이나 증여가 이루어진 이후에는 활용할 수 있는 절세 전략이 크게 제한되는 경우가 많다.

미국과 한국의 상속세 및 증여세 규정은 매우 복잡하게 상호 작용한다. 거주지(Domicile), 세법상 거주자 여부, 자산 소재지(Situs), 자산 평가, 한·미 조세조약, 외국납부세액공제 및 양국 세법 간 조정 문제 등 다양한 요소를 종합적으로 검토해야 한다. 따라서 국제 상속·증여세 분야에 대한 경험이 부족한 전문가의 조언에 의존할 경우 예상하지 못한 세금 부담이나 불리한 결과가 발생할 수 있다.

사전적인 국제 상속·증여세 계획은 가족 자산을 보호하고, 상속세 재원을 확보하기 위한 유동성을 개선하며, 미국과 한국의 세금 영향을 보다 효율적으로 조율하는 데 도움을 줄 수 있다. 또한 세금 납부를 위해 가족 자산을 급히 처분해야 하는 위험을 줄일 수 있다. 이러한 계획은 상속, 증여, 사업 승계 또는 자산 매각 등이 예상되기 훨씬 이전에 수립될 때 가장 효과적이다.

상당한 규모의 한국 자산을 보유하고 있다면 미국과 한국의 국제 상속·증여세 분야에 전문성을 갖춘 자문가와 조기에 상담하는 것이 바람직하다. 적절한 사전 계획은 가족 자산을 보다 효과적으로 보호하고, 다음 세대에 이전되는 재산을 극대화하며, 장기적인 가족 부의 승계를 보다 안정적으로 준비하는 데 큰 도움이 될 수 있다.

Many Korean nationals and former Korean residents who are domiciled in the United States continue to own significant Korean assets, including real estate, privately held businesses, stock in Korean companies, and financial assets maintained with Korean financial institutions.

Although these individuals may have lived in the United States for many years, Korean estate and gift tax considerations often remain highly relevant. The continued ownership of Korean assets can expose families to substantial Korean transfer taxes when wealth is transferred during life or at death. Depending on the facts and circumstances, Korean estate and gift tax may apply to Korean situs assets and, in certain cases, may extend beyond those assets under Korean tax law.

Korea's estate and gift tax regime imposes marginal tax rates of up to 50%, making it one of the highest transfer-tax systems among OECD countries. Without proper planning, these taxes can significantly reduce the wealth ultimately transferred to future generations and create substantial liquidity challenges for heirs.

The United States currently provides a historically high federal estate and gift tax exemption, exceeding $15 million per individual. However, Korean assets owned by individuals who are domiciled in the United States are often subject to both the U.S. and Korean transfer tax systems. Such assets are generally included in the individual's U.S. gross estate and taxable gift calculations and may also be subject to Korean estate or gift taxation. Consequently, significant Korean estate or gift tax liabilities may arise even when little or no U.S. estate or gift tax is payable due to the currently available federal exemption amount.

We frequently encounter situations in which families are forced to sell or liquidate valuable assets simply to generate the cash necessary to satisfy Korean estate or gift tax obligations. In many cases, these outcomes could have been mitigated or avoided through advance planning. Unfortunately, by the time a taxable transfer occurs, many planning opportunities have already been lost.

The interaction between U.S. and Korean estate and gift tax rules can be highly complex. Issues involving domicile, residency, asset situs, valuation, treaty provisions, foreign tax credits, and the coordination of two separate tax systems often require careful analysis. As a result, advice from professionals who are not experienced in cross-border transfer tax matters may be incomplete or lead to unintended consequences.

Proactive cross-border estate planning can help preserve family wealth, improve liquidity, coordinate U.S. and Korean transfer-tax consequences, and reduce the risk of a forced sale of family assets. Planning opportunities are generally most effective when implemented well in advance of a contemplated transfer, liquidity event, or succession plan.

If you or your family own significant Korean assets, we encourage you to consult with qualified professionals who specialize in U.S.-Korea cross-border estate and gift tax planning. Thoughtful planning today can help preserve family wealth, maximize the assets ultimately transferred to future generations, and provide your family with greater financial security and flexibility.

On April 2, 2025, the U.S. government announced sweeping tariffs ranging from 10% to over 50% on imports from nearly every country. This abrupt shift from a longstanding trend of tariff reduction has caused significant disruptions to global supply chains, pricing strategies, and profitability—particularly for multinational enterprises engaged in intercompany transactions. While some nations responded with retaliatory tariffs, others, such as Vietnam and Israel, opted not to respond in kind. The uncertainty surrounding the duration and scope of these tariffs has further compounded business challenges and raised critical issues for transfer pricing compliance.

In the near term, companies are confronting immediate operational challenges as they evaluate the financial impact of the tariffs. Some businesses have chosen to delay imports, scale back production, or expedite shipments to build inventory ahead of tariff enforcement. These short-term strategies, while aimed at minimizing cost exposure, often come at the expense of higher shipping costs and temporary revenue disruption. Long-term responses—such as shifting manufacturing operations or diversifying sourcing—require substantial investment and time, and may not be feasible while the policy outlook remains unclear.

The tariffs represent a material increase in the cost of doing business. Whether businesses choose to absorb these costs or pass them on to consumers, profitability is directly affected. For related-party transactions, the key transfer pricing question becomes how to allocate the economic burden of tariffs among group entities in a manner consistent with the arm’s length principle. Regardless of the chosen strategy—whether maintaining end-user prices, increasing them, or adjusting transfer pricing—system-wide profits tend to decline, and the elasticity of demand only complicates matters further.

Standard transfer pricing methodologies, such as the Comparable Profits Method (CPM), may no longer yield reliable results under these circumstances. Historical comparables might not reflect similar tariff exposure, and varying customer price sensitivities can distort profit comparisons. Taxpayers must carefully consider whether traditional benchmarks remain appropriate and reassess the assumptions underlying existing pricing policies. Routine distributors in the U.S., for example, may be unable to maintain historical margins if they are expected to bear the brunt of the tariff burden.

These developments significantly increase the likelihood of tax disputes. Foreign tax authorities may push for a greater share of profits to remain with local manufacturers, viewing U.S. tariffs as an issue for U.S. entities to absorb. Meanwhile, the IRS has intensified its scrutiny of inbound distribution arrangements, particularly where U.S. entities report losses or unusually low margins. Conflicting positions between jurisdictions could lead to double taxation, necessitating competent authority intervention under bilateral tax treaties.

In an environment characterized by economic uncertainty and geopolitical instability, taxpayers with related party transactions must act swiftly to evaluate the effect of tariffs on group profitability and intercompany pricing. Proactive documentation, well-reasoned adjustments, and readiness for audit scrutiny will be essential to navigating this new trade and tax landscape.

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.

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.