Newsletters
The IRS has released the 2027 inflation-adjusted amounts for health savings accounts under Code Sec. 223. For calendar year 2027, the annual limitation on deductions under Code Sec. 223(b)(2) for a...
The IRS has introduced new online features that allow taxpayers to view and submit Trump Account elections through their IRS Individual Account. The new tools are meant to make the process easier, fa...
The IRS and its Security Summit partners have announced a new framework to better protect taxpayers from identity theft and tax fraud. The updated approach is designed to improve information sharing a...
The IRS has encouraged taxpayers to use official IRS social media accounts and e-News services to stay informed and avoid false tax information online. Social media can be a helpful way to get updates...
The IRS Electronic Tax Administration Advisory Committee released its 2026 annual report with 18 recommendations aimed at improving electronic tax administration and taxpayer service. Six recommendati...
The IRS has released the inflation adjustment factor for the credit for carbon oxide sequestration under Code Sec. 45Q for 2026. The inflation adjustment factor is 1.4639, and the credit is $29.28 p...
The IRS has published the reference price under Code Sec. 45K(d)(2)(C). The credit period for the nonconventional source production credit under Code Sec. 45K ended on December 31, 2013, for facili...
The IRS has announced the applicable percentage under Code Sec. 613A to be used in determining percentage depletion for marginal properties for the 2026 calendar year. Code Sec. 613A(c)(6)(C) defi...
The District of Columbia Attorney General issued an opinion on personal and corporate income tax liabilities for tax year 2025. The opinion states that House Joint Resolution 142, disapproving of Emer...
Maryland announced the expansion of Maryland Tax Connect, a modernized, cloud-based platform, to serve personal income tax filers. Maryland Tax Connect will be available to individual taxpayers beginn...
The Virginia Department of Taxation issued a corporate income tax ruling regarding the appropriate apportionment method that the taxpayer was required to use. Specifically, the Department ruled that t...
The Corporate Transparency Act (“CTA”) was enacted January 1, 2021, as part of the National Defense Authorization Act, representing the most significant reformation of the Bank Secrecy Act and related anti–money laundering rules since the U.S. Patriot Act. The CTA is intended to address and guard against money laundering, terrorism financing, and other forms of illegal financing by mandating certain entities (primarily small and medium size businesses) to report “beneficial owner” information to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”).
The Corporate Transparency Act (“CTA”) was enacted January 1, 2021, as part of the National Defense Authorization Act, representing the most significant reformation of the Bank Secrecy Act and related anti–money laundering rules since the U.S. Patriot Act. The CTA is intended to address and guard against money laundering, terrorism financing, and other forms of illegal financing by mandating certain entities (primarily small and medium size businesses) to report “beneficial owner” information to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”). The CTA authorizes FinCEN, a bureau of the U.S. Treasury Department, to collect, protect, and disclose this information to authorized governmental authorities and to financial institutions in certain circumstances. Our firm is sending you this communication to provide you with some general information regarding the new reporting rules, as well as initial steps you should take to address the implications of the CTA to your organization. We strongly encourage you to reach out as soon as possible to legal counsel with expertise in this area to assist your organization with the steps you need to take to ensure compliance with the CTA, if applicable. What entities are subject to the new CTA reporting requirements?Entities required to comply with the CTA (“Reporting Companies”) include corporations, limited liability companies (LLCs), and other types of companies that are created by a filing with a Secretary of State (“SOS”) or equivalent official. The CTA also applies to non-U.S. companies that register to do business in the U.S. through a filing with an SOS or equivalent official. Since the definition of a domestic entity under the CTA is extremely broad, additional entity types could be subject to CTA reporting requirements based on individual state law formation practices. There are a number of exceptions to who is required to file under the CTA. Many of the exceptions are entities already regulated by federal or state governments, and as such already disclose their beneficial ownership information to governmental authorities. Another notable exception is for “large operating companies” defined as companies that meet all the following requirements: · Employ at least 20 full-time employees in the U.S. · Gross revenue (or sales) over $5 million on the prior year’s tax return · An operating presence at a physical office in the U.S. Who is considered a “beneficial owner” of a Reporting Company?A beneficial owner is any individual who, directly or indirectly, exercises “substantial control” or owns or controls at least 25% of the company’s ownership interests. An individual exercises “substantial control” if the individual (i) serves as a senior officer of the company; (ii) has authority over the appointment or removal of any senior officer or a majority of the board; or (iii) directs, determines, or has substantial influence over important decisions made by the Reporting Company. Thus, senior officers and other individuals with control over the company are beneficial owners under the CTA, even if they have no equity interest in the company. In addition, individuals may exercise control directly or indirectly, through board representation, ownership, rights associated with financing arrangements, or control over intermediary entities that separately or collectively exercise substantial control. CTA regulations provide a much more expansive definition of “substantial control” than in the traditional tax sense, so many companies may need to seek legal guidance to ultimately determine who are deemed beneficial owners within their organization. Phase-in of reporting requirementsAs currently promulgated, the CTA’s reporting requirements will be phased-in in two stages: · All new Reporting Companies — those formed (or, in the case of non-U.S. companies, registered) on or after January 1, 2024 — must report required information within 901 days after their formation or registration. · All existing Reporting Companies — those formed or registered before January 1, 2024 — must report required information no later than January 1, 2025. How to prepare for the CTAWith the CTA introducing a new and expansive reporting regime, now is the time to assess the new rules’ implications on your organization. Some questions and comments for your company to consider now, although not meant to be all-inclusive, include: · Is your company subject to the CTA, or do you qualify for any of the exemptions? · If your company is not exempt, how should you calculate percentages of “ownership interests” to determine whether any owners meet the 25%-ownership threshold? In many companies with simple capital structures, the answer will be obvious. It may be much less obvious, however, for companies with complicated capital structures (given the expansive definition of “ownership interest”), or companies in which some ownership interests are held indirectly — for example, through upper-tier investment entities, holding companies, or trusts. · How do you assess and determine each person who exercises “substantial control” over the company? There may well be multiple people who qualify, given the expansiveness (and vagueness) of the “substantial control” definition. 1 FinCEN issued a final rule on November 29, 2023, extending the deadline for companies created or registered in 2024 to file initial beneficial ownership information (BOI) reports to 90 calendar days after their formation or registration (was originally 30 days). · What new processes and procedures should the company put in place to monitor future changes in its beneficial owners and reportable changes on existing beneficial owners that will require timely updated reports to FinCEN? Note that the types of information that must be provided to FinCEN (and kept current) for these beneficial owners include the owner’s legal name, residential address, date of birth, and unique identifier number from a non-expired passport, driver’s license, or state identification card (including an image of the unique-identifier documentation). A word of caution, this is going to be a trap for Reporting Companies, as you will need to rely on beneficial owners to timely update you on reportable changes to their information (e.g., ownership changes, moves, marriages, divorces, etc.). As a result, a company’s operative documents may need to be revised to include provisions related to the CTA such as representations, covenants, indemnifications, and consent clauses. For example, the operating agreement may require: · A representation by each shareholder, member or partner, as applicable, that it will be in compliance with or exempt from the CTA; · A covenant by each shareholder, member or partner, as applicable, requiring continued compliance with and disclosure under the CTA or to provide evidence of exemption from its requirements; · An indemnification by each shareholder, member or partner, as applicable, to the company and its other shareholders, members or partners, as applicable, for its failure to comply with the CTA or for providing false information; and · A consent by each disclosing party for the company to disclose identifying information to FinCEN, to the extent required by law. Take immediate action now!As the CTA is not a part of the tax code, the assessment and application of many of the requirements set forth in the regulations, including but not limited to the determination of beneficial ownership interest, may necessitate the need for legal guidance and direction. As such, since we are not attorneys, our firm is not able to provide you with any legal determination whether an exemption applies to the nature of your entity or whether legal relationships constitute beneficial ownership. Since the filing of the Beneficial Ownership Report is a legal matter, we will not provide services in the area. We strongly encourage you to reach out as soon as possible to legal counsel with expertise in this area to assist your organization with the steps you need to take to ensure compliance with the CTA, if applicable.
Note that penalties for willfully violating the CTA’s reporting requirements include (1) civil penalties of up to $5912 per day that a violation is not remedied, (2) a criminal fine of up to $10,000, and/or (3) imprisonment of up to two years.
2 The penalties for BOI reporting violations have been inflation adjusted and are increased to $591 a day from $500, effective January 25, 2024.
For additional information regarding the beneficial ownership reporting requirements under the CTA, refer to FinCEN’s Frequently Asked Questions document at https://www.fincen.gov/boi-faqs.
Sincerely, Bishop, Farmer & Co., LLP |
The House Ways and Means Committee recently offered a window into what the legislative body is working on when it comes to developing legislation to govern the taxation of digital assets, highlighting six bills and a discussion draft covering a range of topics.
The House Ways and Means Committee recently offered a window into what the legislative body is working on when it comes to developing legislation to govern the taxation of digital assets, highlighting six bills and a discussion draft covering a range of topics.
As part of the development, the committee held a June 9, 2026, hearing to solicit commentary from industry on the bills, during which committee Chairman Jason Smith (R-Mo.) called the “digital asset status quo is untenable. America needs clear tax rules of the road to remain the crypto capital of the world.”
Smith stated that cryptocurrency has “a market capitalization of over $2 trillion. That’s a massive industry by any measure, and nearly all other industries of a similar size enjoy clear tax policies.”
Chairman Smith noted that more and more people own cryptocurrency and “nearly a quarter of cryptocurrency holders earn less than $75,000 and the average crypto holder is nearly as likely to work in construction, manufacturing, or food service as tech or finance.”
The bills and discussion draft include:
- The Applying Existing Tax Anti-Abuse Rules to Digital Assets Act (H.R. 9172)
- The Charitable Deductions for Digital Donations Act (H.R. 9173)
- The Digital Assets Voluntary Disclosure Program Act (H.R. 9174)
- The Tax Clarity for Mining and Staking Act (H.R. 9175)
- The Providing Analogous Rules for Digital Assets Act (H.R. 9176)
- The Less Tax Paperwork for Digital Asset Owners Act (H.R. 9178)
- The End Digital Assets Tax Shelters Act (Discussion Draft)
The proposed legislation address “three key gaps in the current tax regime that make it harder for Americans to fully participate in the digital asset ecosystem,”
First, he said, “common digital transactions like mining and staking do not fit clearly into existing tax law. In other places, the tax code is silent as to the treatment of digital assets. The ambiguity creates an opening for taxpayers to exploit the law and avoid paying taxes in some circumstances and creates unfair tax burdens on others.
Second, Smith stated that “digital assets do not receive the tax benefit nor the protection from anti-abuse rules long granted to traditional financial assets. The imbalance between digital assets and traditional financial assets creates a two-tier system that unintentionally favor certain assets over others.”
Third, “crypto owners face burdensome tax compliance that makes using digital assets in ordinary commerce almost impossible.” Smith noted that “31 percent of crypto owners would like to buy a cup of coffee at the local shop, yet each $5 cup of coffee bought with a digital asset generates two new pieces of tax paperwork,” which adds a significant burden to both the IRS and the taxpayer.
Ranking Member Richard Neal (R-Mass.) had mixed reviews on the bills. He described his initial observation as some of the bills being “quite sensible, providing clear rules of the road for taxpayers looking to comply with the law. Other provisions sought the common sense goal of alleviating burdensome paperwork requirements, especially in situations where it’s highly unlikely that there would be any tax associated with those transactions, and indeed there are provisions that would close loopholes that are specific to the digital asset industry.”
However, Neal also noted that “it appears there are some provisions that deviate substantially from general tax principles, providing a distinct advantage that are beyond some other investments. We want to be careful about putting a thumb on the scale, and as we all know, it’s much easier to put something into the tax code than it is to take it out.”
Lawrence Zlatkin, Coinbase vice president of tax, testified during the hearing that the bills “represent the most comprehensive effort to modernize digital asset taxation that we have seen to date. Most importantly, this legislation recognized a fundamental reality: market structure and tax policy go hand-in-hand.”
In particular, Zlatkin highlighted H.R. 9178, which he testified “is an important step forward towards making stablecoin payments practical while reducing unnecessary reporting noise,” as well as H.R. 9173, which “provides long-needed clarity for mining and staking rewards, helping ensure taxpayers are not forced into tax obligations before they’ve generated liquidity though an actual sale.”
Mike Kaercher, deputy director of the Tax Law Center at New York University, cautioned that as the bills move through the process, “I encourage policymakers to consider three tax policy principles most closely: parity, administrability, and guardrails to prevent abuse. Some of the provisions in these bills would make improvements consistent with these principles.”
Among those, Kaercher testified that for example, “one of the bills would extend anti-abuse regimes, like wash sale rules and constructive sale rules, to digital assets. That’s a good idea. Another example is the de minimis provision on qualifying stablecoins – a targeted approach with guardrails can reduce paperwork and compliance burdens without creating substantial hidden tax subsidies for digital assets, but the rule should remain targeted because a broader de minimis provision risks abuse and would favor investments in digital assets over those in traditional finance.”
On the provision of deferring tax on mining and staking rewards, Kaercher testified that deferral “isn’t just the distortive subsidy, it could also undermine administrability. Deferral increases complexity for taxpayers and makes it harder for the IRS to do its job.”
He also warned about the possibility of government bailouts if guardrails and policy are not correctly developed.
“I think one thing for policymakers to consider on this is that if digital assets become a larger part of retirement accounts and the assets remain highly volatile, or in a worst-case scenario, crash, that would have an enormous impact on households’ retirement savings, and if that were to happen, I think policymakers would have to think about whether to respond with something like a bailout.”
The Treasury Department, Department of Labor, and Department of Health and Human Services finalized regulations implementing the independent dispute resolution (IDR) process established under the No Surprises Act (P.L. 116-260). The regulations provide new disclosure and administration requirements for group health plans and health insurance issuers related to surprise billing protections. Although the final rules are generally effective August 3, 2026, several provisions have delayed applicability dates.
The Treasury Department, Department of Labor, and Department of Health and Human Services finalized regulations implementing the independent dispute resolution (IDR) process established under the No Surprises Act (P.L. 116-260). The regulations provide new disclosure and administration requirements for group health plans and health insurance issuers related to surprise billing protections. Although the final rules are generally effective August 3, 2026, several provisions have delayed applicability dates.
The final rules require plans and issuers to use claim adjustment reason codes (CARCs) and remittance advice remark codes (RARCs), as specified in guidance, when providing any paper or electronic remittance advice to an entity that does not have a contractual relationship with the plan or issuer. These disclosures must be included along with the initial payment or notice of denial of payment for certain items and services subject to the surprise billing protections in the No Surprises Act.
The regulations also make several procedural updates to the federal IDR process. These include refinements to the open negotiation period, the formal initiation of the IDR process, and the dispute eligibility review procedures. Further, the rules address the payment and collection of administrative fees as well as certified IDR entity fees.
The agencies also finalized the definition of bundled payment arrangements, amended requirements related to batched items and services, and amended the rules for extensions of timeframes due to extenuating circumstances. Additionally, the regulation finalizes provisions that require plans and issuers to register in the federal IDR portal.
The IRS has published the inflation adjustment factor and reference prices for determining the credit for renewable electricity production for calendar year 2026 sales of kilowatt hours of electricity produced in the U.S. or a U.S. possession from qualified energy resources.
The IRS has published the inflation adjustment factor and reference prices for determining the credit for renewable electricity production for calendar year 2026 sales of kilowatt hours of electricity produced in the U.S. or a U.S. possession from qualified energy resources.
The inflation adjustment factor for qualified energy resources is 2.0570. The reference price for facilities producing electricity from wind is 3.17 cents per kilowatt hour. The reference prices for facilities producing electricity from closed-loop biomass, open-loop biomass, geothermal energy, solar energy, municipal solid waste, qualified hydropower production and marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy have not been determined for calendar year 2026.
Phaseout Limits
For electricity sold during the calendar year 2026, the renewable electricity production credit is not subject to a phaseout under Code Sec. 45(b)(1) for electricity produced from wind. This is because the 2026 reference price for electricity produced from wind, 3.17 cents per kilowatt hour, does not exceed 8 cents multiplied by the inflation adjustment factor (2.0570). The phase-out of the credit also does not apply to electricity sold in 2026 and produced from closed-loop biomass, open-loop biomass, geothermal energy, solar energy, municipal solid waste, qualified hydropower production and marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy.
Credit Amount Adjustments
The credit for renewable electricity production for calendar year 2026 under Code Sec. 45(a) is 3.1 cents per kilowatt hour on the sale of electricity produced from the qualified energy resources of wind, closed-loop biomass and geothermal energy. The credit is 1.5 cents per kilowatt hour on the sale of electricity produced in open-loop biomass facilities, landfill gas facilities, trash facilities, qualified hydropower facilities and marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy facilities.
The IRS updated guidance relating to the energy community provisions in:
- Code Sec. 45 production tax credit for electricity produced from certain resources;
- — the resource-neutral Code Sec. 45Y clean electricity production credit that largely replaces the Code Sec. 45 credit for property placed in service after 2024;
- — the Code Sec. 48 business energy investment credit for investments in property that produces electricity from certain resources; and
- — the resource-neutral Code Sec. 48E clean energy investment credit that largely replaces the Code Sec. 48 credit for property placed in service after 2024.
The IRS updated guidance relating to the energy community provisions in:
- — the Code Sec. 45 production tax credit for electricity produced from certain resources;
- — the resource-neutral Code Sec. 45Y clean electricity production credit that largely replaces the Code Sec. 45 credit for property placed in service after 2024;
- — the Code Sec. 48 business energy investment credit for investments in property that produces electricity from certain resources; and
- — the resource-neutral Code Sec. 48E clean energy investment credit that largely replaces the Code Sec. 48 credit for property placed in service after 2024.
Annual Statistical Area Category and Coal Closure Category Update
Notice 2026-39 publishes information taxpayers may use to determine whether they meet certain requirements under the Statistical Area Category or the Coal Closure Category for purposes of qualifying for energy community bonus credit amounts or rates.
- (1) Appendix 1 lists counties and county-equivalents that qualify as energy communities because they meet the Fossil Fuel Employment threshold and the unemployment rate requirement for calendar year 2025.
- (2) Appendix 2 lists newly identified census tracts with either a coal mine closure or a coal-fired electric generating unit retirement, and census tracts directly adjoining those tracts.
- (3) Appendix 3 lists census tracts that newly qualify as coal closure census tracts because of location-data corrections issued since the publication of Notice 2025-31.
The Treasury Department and the IRS have announced plans to issue proposed regulations under Code Sec. 4960 expanding the definition of a covered employee for purposes of the excise tax on excessive compensation paid by applicable tax-exempt organizations (ATEOs). The guidance follows amendments made by section 70416 of the One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act and applies to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2025.
The Treasury Department and the IRS have announced plans to issue proposed regulations under Code Sec. 4960 expanding the definition of a covered employee for purposes of the excise tax on excessive compensation paid by applicable tax-exempt organizations (ATEOs). The guidance follows amendments made by section 70416 of the One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act and applies to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2025.
Before the legislative change, a covered employee generally was one of an ATEO’s five highest-compensated employees for the tax year at issue or an individual who previously held that status. The amended law broadens the definition to include any employee of an ATEO and certain former employees for taxable years beginning after 2025. However, individuals who were not covered employees under the pre-2026 rules will not become covered employees solely because they worked for an ATEO before 2026.
The forthcoming regulations are expected to eliminate references to the five highest-compensated employees standard and make conforming changes. The agencies intend to retain exceptions similar to the current limited-hours and non-exempt funds exceptions, but discontinue the limited-services exception because its rationale no longer applies. Until proposed regulations are issued, ATEOs may rely on Notice 2026-36. The Treasury Department and the IRS requested comments on the proposed rules by August 4, 2026.
The IRS has issued the 2025 Data Book detailing the agency’s activities during fiscal year 2025. The report provided an overview of the agency’s operations to meet statutory responsibilities. The revenue collected by the Service exceeded $5.3 trillion.
The IRS has issued the 2025 Data Book detailing the agency’s activities during fiscal year 2025. The report provided an overview of the agency’s operations to meet statutory responsibilities. The revenue collected by the Service exceeded $5.3 trillion.
“Fiscal Year 2025 was a pivotal year, as we began the process of implementing tax relief for hardworking Americans enacted as part of the Working Families Tax Cuts Act (WFTC),” said IRS CEO Frank J. Bisignano. “The numbers in the Data Book tell the story of an organization that serves as a key partner in the administration’s mission,” he added. The CEO also highlighted efforts to transform the IRS into a digital-first agency. These efforts would reduce paper processing through the “zero paper” initiative.
During the 2026 filing season, around 45 percent of individual tax returns claimed one or more of the new tax benefits from the WFTC. The average refund on a return claiming one of these deductions was over $3,200, as of May 27.
Further, online tools, including the IRS Online Account were upgraded to expand access and add new features. Expanded technology and advanced analytics would allow the Service to identify high-risk areas of non-compliance and tax fraud. Finally, more information can be found here.
The IRS announced the release of a new calculator to determine interest rates for large, multi-year construction and manufacturing projects. The calculator is named Percentage-of-Completion Method (PCM) Look-Back Interest Calculator and is MS Excel based. It supports calculations for Form 8697, Interest Computation Under the Look-Back Method for Completed Long-Term Contracts. However, it does not address all fact patterns or complexities associated with look-back interest calculations.
The IRS announced the release of a new calculator to determine interest rates for large, multi-year construction and manufacturing projects. The calculator is named Percentage-of-Completion Method (PCM) Look-Back Interest Calculator and is MS Excel based. It supports calculations for Form 8697, Interest Computation Under the Look-Back Method for Completed Long-Term Contracts. However, it does not address all fact patterns or complexities associated with look-back interest calculations.
“The IRS is focused on improving and enhancing how we serve taxpayers,” said IRS Chief Executive Officer Frank J. Bisignano. “We are transforming the IRS into a digital-first agency that provides the best possible experience for taxpayers, and tools like this calculator are an important step in that effort,” he added.
The look-back interest is determined using a three-step process:
- Hypothetically reallocating income to prior tax year based on actual revenues and costs;
- Computing hypothetical tax overpayments or underpayments of tax; and
- Calculating interest on tax underpayments or overpayments.
Taxpayers and tax practitioners may submit feedback about the calculator, by emailing Stakeholder Liaison and including "Look-Back Interest Workbook Feedback" in the subject line. More information can be found here.
IR 2026-70