Limited Liability Companies – Actions Speak Louder Than Words

Because of its asset protection and tax advantages, the limited liability company has become a popular choice for form of entity. While it is relatively easy to form a limited liability company, it is important to note that various “post-formation” action is necessary to derive the intended benefits from the limited liability company. If you want to maximize the asset protection from your limited liability company, the Orix case suggests that California is not a favorable jurisdiction to use; other states, such as Delaware and Nevada, offer a better alternative on the “charging order/foreclosure” issue.

Internal Revenue Service Clarifies “Qualified Tips” Deduction

The “qualified tips” deduction is often incorrectly described as a “no tax on tips” provision. On September 19, 2025, the Internal Revenue Service issued proposed regulations under Code Section 224 (the “Code Section 224 Proposed Regulations”). Perhaps the key topic addressed by the Code Section 224 Proposed Regulations is the meaning of the phrase, “an occupation which customarily and regularly received tips on or before December 31, 2024”. Qualified tips must be paid without compulsion. Thus, service charges, automatic gratuities and any other mandatory amounts automatically added to a customer’s bill by the vendor or establishment are not qualified tips, even if the amounts are subsequently distributed to employees. “Table 1” in the Code Section 224 Proposed Regulations lists 68 “occupations” as “Occupations that Customarily and Regularly Received Tips on or Before December 31, 2024” – the 68 listed below.

“Relevant” Under the Economic Substance Doctrine – The Case of Patel v. Commissioner

One of the basic principles of tax law is the economic substance doctrine. As recognized for many years in case law, under the economic substance doctrine, courts would generally examine both whether a transaction had economic substance beyond tax benefits and whether there was a nontax business purpose for entering the transaction; transactions that could not meet the economic substance doctrine could be disregarded or disallowed for tax purposes. The Tax Court in the Patel case concluded that (1) the taxpayer’s captive insurance company transactions did not have economic substance under the two-part “economic substance doctrine” test.

Estate of Rowland – An Important Federal Estate Tax Case Concerning Portability

Given that asset values tend to increase over time, and Federal estate tax liability tends to arise more on the death of a “second-to die” spouse than on the death of a “first-to-die” spouse, portability can be a critical concept to minimize Federal estate tax liability. Additionally, Revenue Procedure 2025-28 is relevant for taxpayers seeking to amend their tax returns for taxable years 2022 through 2024 and claim a 100% full deduction of their “domestic research or experimental expenditures” in those taxable years.

The 2025 Tax Act – Key Business Tax Provisions

One key change for business taxpayers under the 2025 Tax Act concerns the tax treatment of “domestic research or experimental expenditures” (often also referred to as “U.S. R&D” costs). Also, the 2025 Tax Act permanently enacts into law the provision from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 that created the “qualified business income” deduction – generally allowing a 20% deduction with respect to the “qualified business income” from partnerships, S corporations, and sole proprietorships.

HK® Bobby Pen & The Pen Pals® FE8A5C COMPRESSED Trump Big Beautiful

The 2025 Tax Act – Key Individual Tax Provisions

Whether it is called by its popular name, the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act”, or by its official legal name, “An Act . . . To provide for reconciliation pursuant to title II of H. Con. Res. 14”, the legislation enacted by Congress on July 3, 2025 and signed into law by President Donald Trump on July 4, 2025 (the “2025 Tax Act”), will have a significant impact on taxpayers. This article describes the key individual tax provisions of the 2025 Tax Act.

“Related Party” Transactions

This article focuses on “related party” transactions under Internal Revenue Code Section 267(a)(1) and Internal Revenue Code Section 1239(a). While there is some overlap, it should be noted that the specific scope of “related parties” for purposes of a “related party” transaction under Internal Revenue Code Section 1239(a) is different than the specific scope of “related parties” under Internal Revenue Code Section 267(a)(1).