A number of states have recently proposed or passed new laws related to state-level taxation, some of which are taxpayer-friendly and some of which are expected to impose additional tax burdens on taxpayers. They vary in subject from efforts by states to mitigate the new federal limitation on the deductibility of state and local taxes to proposed changes to state income taxation of “carried interest.” This update reflects some of those recent proposals and laws.
Tax Reform
New Tax Law (H.R. 1): Key Highlights Related to Interest Bearing Debt
On Friday December 22, 2017, the President signed into law H.R.1, commonly referred to as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA). This is the most sweeping change to the US federal income tax laws in over three decades, and it will affect every US taxpayer, including participants in the capital markets. The purpose of this blog post is to focus on some of the provisions of the TCJA that will impact interest bearing debt, including leveraged loans and high-yield bond offerings. For background and a more detailed discussion of the TCJA provisions generally, please see, House of Representatives and Senate Conferees Reach Agreement on the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (H.R. 1).
Tax Reform’s Effect on the Sports Industry
On Friday, December 22, 2017, President Trump signed into law H.R. 1, the $1.5 trillion tax reform law known as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “Tax Reform Act”). This alert describes provisions of the Tax Reform Act that we expect will have the most significant impact and immediate effect on the sports industry. Unless otherwise noted, all proposals described below will be effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017.
Tax Reform Act Denies Deductions for Some Sexual Harassment Settlements
In a little-noticed provision buried deep inside the new Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (signed into law on Dec. 22) is the following “denial of deduction”:
“Payments related to sexual harassment and sexual abuse – No deduction shall be allowed under this chapter for –
- any settlement or payment related
…
Tax Reform: Impact at the State Level
In a radio segment on Marketplace, partner David Miller comments on tax reform and the impact of the new $10,000 cap on the state income, property and sales tax that individuals can deduct. The segment also explores the loopholes and workarounds that states could implement to allow their residents to …
House of Representatives and Senate Conferees Reach Agreement on the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (H.R. 1): Description of the Conference Agreement and Differences from House and Senate Versions
On Friday, December 15, the U.S. House of Representative and Senate conferees reached agreement on the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (H.R. 1) (the “Final Bill”), and released legislative text, an explanation, and the Joint Committee on Taxation estimated budget effects (commonly referred to as the “score”). Next week the House and Senate are each expected to pass the bill, and it is expected to be sent to the President for signature the following week. As the conferees actually signed the conference text, changes (even of a limited and/or technical nature) are extremely unlikely at this point.
The Final Bill largely follows the Senate bill, but with certain important differences. We outline some of the most significant differences between the Final Bill, the earlier House bill, and the Senate bill. We then discuss in detail some of the most significant provisions of the Final Bill. The provisions discussed are generally proposed to apply to tax years beginning after December 31, 2017, subject to certain exceptions (only some of which are noted below). While we discuss some of these provisions in detail, we do not address all restrictions, exclusions, and various other nuances applicable to any given provision.
To Accelerate or Not? Potential Tax Planning in Light of Proposed Reforms to Code Section 162(m)
Under both the House and Senate versions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, Internal Revenue Code Section 162(m) would be modified to expand the scope of companies and executive officers subject to the limitation on deductibility of compensation over $1 million, as well as to eliminate the exception to non-deductibility under Section 162(m) for qualified performance-based compensation. The changes would be effective for tax years after 2017, but under the Senate bill, binding contracts in effect on November 2, 2017 would be grandfathered if not materially modified on or after that date). Each version of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act would also generally lower the corporate tax rate to 20%. The House bill reduces the corporate tax rate beginning in 2018 and the Senate reduces it beginning in 2019.
Comparison of the Executive Compensation Provisions in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act
On December 2, 2017, the Senate approved its version of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which contains proposals modifying certain executive compensation provisions of the Internal Revenue Code. The Senate’s approval of the executive compensation provisions follows substantively the same provisions proposed by the Senate Finance Committee’s bill, and…
Tax Planning Under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act: Flow-Throughs Are the Answer to Everything
The tax reform bills introduced in the House of Representatives and the Senate dramatically reduce the corporate tax rate from 35% to 20% and create added incentives for taxpayers to invest capital into U.S. businesses with expanded expensing and reduced flow-through rates.
But the bills were drafted quickly, Congress is rushing to get them passed by the end of the year, and the Internal Revenue Code is a complicated thing. Unintended consequences result, and pass-throughs offer opportunities. In fact, a drafting glitch may provide hedge and lending fund investors with an inadvertent tax reduction.
Tax Reform: Focus on the Sports Industry
Over the last several days, there have been significant developments relating to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the pending tax reform legislation in Congress.[1] On Thursday, a detailed summary of the Senate Finance Committee’s proposal was released (the “Senate Markup”),[2] and the House Ways and Means Committee voted (in a 24-16, party-line vote) to advance their bill for consideration by the full House of Representatives (the “House Bill”).[3] This post describes provisions of the Senate Markup and House Bill that would have the most significant impact on the sports industry, including important differences between the two proposals. Unless otherwise noted, all proposals described below would be effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017.