REG - Personal Flashcards
Susan inherits her father's house upon his death. At the time of the inheritance, the father's basis in the property was $100,000. The fair market value of the house at the time of the inheritance was $90,000. The alternative valuation method was not elected in regard to the father's estate. Susan does not use the house as her principal residence and subsequently sells the house for $95,000. Susan will include a capital gain/loss of what amount on her individual tax return in the year she sells the house $5,000 gain $5,000 loss $0 gain $95,000 gain
$5,000 gain
The basis of inherited property is generally the value of the property (as determined for estate tax purposes) at the decedent’s date of death. The estate tax value is generally the fair market value of the property as of the date of death. In certain limited circumstances, the executor or personal representative is permitted to elect an alternate valuation date. In such a case, the basis will be the fair market value six months after the date of death or upon sale within six months.
In this question, Susan’s basis in the property is $90,000 (the fair market value at the time of the inheritance). Thus, when she sold the property for $95,000, she incurred a $5,000 gain.
IRC Section 1014(a)
View referenced content in book.
4420 Basis and Holding Periods of Assets
4450 Amount and Character of Gains and Losses, and Netting …
Which of the following is not considered a primary authoritative source when conducting tax research Internal Revenue Code Tax Court cases IRS publications Treasury Regulations
IRS publications
The Internal Revenue Code, or IRC, is the most authoritative source when conducting tax research. Treasury Regulations and U.S. Tax Court cases are also primary sources. IRS publications are not considered a primary authoritative source when conducting tax research.
View referenced content in book.
4381 Authoritative Hierarchy
Under Treasury Circular 230, which of the following actions of a CPA tax advisor is characteristic of a best practice in rendering tax advice
Requesting written evidence from a client that the fee proposal for tax advice has been approved by the board of directors
Recommending to the client that the advisor’s tax advice be made orally instead of in a written memorandum
Establishing relevant facts, evaluating the reasonableness of assumptions and representations, and arriving at a conclusion supported by the law and facts in a tax memorandum
Requiring the client to supply a written representation, signed under penalties of perjury, concerning the facts and statements provided to the CPA for preparing a tax memorandum
Establishing relevant facts, evaluating the reasonableness of assumptions and representations, and arriving at a conclusion supported by the law and facts in a tax memorandum
Generally, a CPA can rely on information furnished by a client in the preparation of a tax memorandum. If the information seems to be incorrect, inconsistent, or incomplete, the CPA must make reasonable inquiries. When the facts are established, then relevant tax law must be applied accurately to the known facts.
View referenced content in book.
4111 Treasury Department Circular 230
A tax preparer has advised a company to take a position on its tax return. The tax preparer believes that there is a 75% possibility that the position will be sustained if audited by the IRS. If the position is not sustained, an accuracy-related penalty and a late-payment penalty would apply. What is the tax preparer’s responsibility regarding disclosure of the penalty to the company
The tax preparer is responsible for disclosing both penalties to the company
The tax preparer is responsible for disclosing only the accuracy-related penalty to the company.
The tax preparer is responsible for disclosing only the late-payment penalty to the company.
The tax preparer has no responsibility for disclosing any potential penalties to the company, because the position will probably be sustained on audit.
The tax preparer is responsible for disclosing both penalties to the company
A practitioner must inform a client of any and all penalties that are likely to apply to the client with respect to a position taken on a tax return.
Circular 230, Section 10.34(c)(1)
View referenced content in book.
4111 Treasury Department Circular 230
Which of the following facts will result in an offering of securities being exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933
The securities are nonvoting preferred stock.
The issuing corporation was closely held prior to the offering.
The sale or offer to sell the securities is made by a person other than an issuer, underwriter, or dealer.
The securities are AAA-rated debentures that are collateralized by first mortgages on property that has a market value of 200% of the offering price.
The sale or offer to sell the securities is made by a person other than an issuer, underwriter, or dealer.
Under the Securities Act of 1933, most issuances of securities must first be registered with the SEC. However, this requirement is only applicable to issuers, underwriters, and dealers. An “issuer” is the individual or business entity that is offering the securities for sale to the public. It may also include a “control person,” meaning someone having substantial power to influence the policies of management (such as the president of the company).
Thus, a sale or offer to sell the securities is made by a person other than an issuer, underwriter, or dealer (e.g., a stockbroker) is exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933.
No exemption from registration applies just because the securities are nonvoting preferred stock or the issuing corporation was closely held prior to the offering or even if the securities are AAA-rated debentures that are collateralized by first mortgages on property that has a market value of 200% of the offering price.
View referenced content in book.
4251 Federal Securities Regulation
In preparing Watt’s individual income tax return, Stark, CPA, took a deduction contrary to a Tax Court decision that had disallowed a similar deduction. Stark’s position was adopted in good faith and with a reasonable belief that the Tax Court decision failed to conform to the Internal Revenue Code. Under the circumstances, Stark will:
be liable for the preparer’s negligence penalty.
not be liable for a preparer penalty unless the understatement of taxes is at least 25% of Watt’s tax liability.
be liable for the preparer’s penalty because of Stark’s intentional disregard of the Tax Court decision.
not be liable for a preparer penalty if Stark exercised due diligence.
not be liable for a preparer penalty if Stark exercised due diligence.
IRC Section 6501 contains a penalty for the omission of at least 25% of gross income, not tax liability.
Under IRC Section 6694(a)(3), no penalty will be imposed if there is reasonable cause for the action and the preparer acted in good faith. The penalty under this section applies if there is an intentional disregard of rules or regulations—not court cases. IRC Section 6662(c) defines negligence as the failure to make a reasonable attempt to comply with tax law. A position taken in good faith would not be negligence.
View referenced content in book.
4113 Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as Amended, and …
Dowd, Elgar, Frost, and Grant formed a general partnership. Their written partnership agreement provided that the profits would be divided so that Dowd would receive 40%; Elgar, 30%; Frost, 20%; and Grant, 10%. There was no provision for allocating losses. At the end of its first year, the partnership had losses of $200,000. Before allocating losses, the partners’ capital account balances were: Dowd, $120,000; Elgar, $100,000; Frost, $75,000; and Grant, $11,000. Grant refuses to make any further contributions to the partnership. Ignore the effects of federal partnership tax law.
What would be Grant's share of the partnership losses $9,000 $20,000 $39,000 $50,000
$20,000
Grant’s share of the partnership losses is $20,000. The computation is based on the legal principle that if there is no provision for allocating losses, the method used to allocate profits will be used.
- Grant 10% of profits
- 0.10 × $200,000 (losses) = $20,000
View referenced content in book.
4264 Rights, Duties, Legal Obligations, and Authority of …
Which of the following entities may adopt any tax year-end C corporation S corporation Limited liability company Trust
C corporation
A C corporation may adopt any tax year-end. An S corporation is generally required to adopt a calendar year-end. An LLC with two or more members is taxed as a partnership in the absence of an election otherwise. The partnership’s taxable year must correspond to the partner’s taxable year and they are, therefore, generally calendar years. A trust may only adopt a calendar year.
IRC Sections 444(e), 706(b), and 644; Regulation Section 301.7701-2(c)(1)
View referenced content in book.
4662 Income and Deductions
What is the initial maximum annual gross receipts test amount beneath which a small business corporation qualifies for relief from the AMT $5 million $6 million $7 million $7.5 million
$5 million
A small corporation is exempt from AMT tax. In general, to be considered a small corporation for this purpose, the corporation must have average annual gross receipts under $7.5 million for the preceding 3-year period.
A special rule applies for the first two years a corporation is in existence. All corporations are exempt from AMT for their first tax year. The second tax year of a new corporation is its initial test year. The gross receipts test for a corporation’s initial test year is $5 million to qualify as a small corporation exempt from AMT. For all later years, the gross receipts test is $7.5 million.
For example, New Corp. starts January 2, 2012, and has gross receipts of $4 million in 2012 and $7 million in 2013. New Corp. is not subject to AMT in 2012 since that is its first tax year. For 2013, it is not subject to the AMT since the gross receipts in its preceding tax year of $4 million is less than the $5 million initial test year threshold. For 2014, it is not subject to AMT because the average annual receipts in the preceding tax years of $5.5 million is less than the $7.5 million general test threshold.
IRC Section 55(e)
View referenced content in book.
4632 Tax Computations and Credits, Including Alternative …
For Year 2, Quest Corp., an accrual-basis calendar-year C corporation, had an $8,000 unexpired charitable contribution carryover from Year 1. Quest’s Year 2 taxable income before the deduction for charitable contributions was $200,000. On December 12, Year 2, Quest’s board of directors authorized a $15,000 cash contribution to a qualified charity, which was made on January 6, Year 3.
What is the maximum allowable deduction that Quest may take as a charitable contribution on its Year 2 income tax return
$23,000
$20,000
$15,000
$8,000
$20,000
For an accrual-basis corporation, any charitable contribution authorized by the board of directors prior to year-end and paid within 2-1/2 months from year-end may be deducted on the prior-year tax return.
The maximum allowable deduction that Quest Corp. may take as a charitable contribution is 10% of $200,000 (its taxable income), which is $20,000.
The current-year charitable contribution is used first before any carryover. In Year 2, Quest will use all of the current-year contribution of $15,000 plus $5,000 of the carryover contribution from Year 1. The remaining carryover of $3,000 from Year 1’s contribution will be carried over to Year 4.
View referenced content in book.
4631 Determination of Taxable Income/Loss
Wren purchased a factory from First Federal Realty. Wren paid 20% at the closing and gave a note for the balance secured by a 20-year mortgage. Five years later, Wren found it increasingly difficult to make payments on the note and defaulted. First Federal threatened to accelerate the loan and foreclose if Wren continued in default. First Federal told Wren to make payment or obtain an acceptable third party to assume the obligation. Wren offered the land to Moss, Inc., for $10,000 less than the equity Wren had in the property. This was acceptable to First Federal and at the closing Moss paid the arrearage, assumed the mortgage and note, and had title transferred to its name. First Federal released Wren. The transaction in question is:
an assignment and delegation.
a third-party beneficiary contract.
a novation.
a purchase of land subject to a mortgage.
a novation.
A novation occurs (generally with regard to a mortgage) when a third party assumes a liability and the original lender releases the original debtor from the liability.
View referenced content in book.
4224 Discharge, Breach, and Remedies
During an audit of Trent Realty Corp.’s financial statements, Clark, CPA, reviewed the following instrument:
FRONT OF INSTRUMENT BACK OF INSTRUMENT
To: Pure Bank M. West
Upton, VT
Pay to C. Larr
April 5, 20X1 T. Keetin
Pay to the order of M. West $1,500.00
One Thousand Five Hundred and 00/100 Dollars C. Larr
on May 1, 20X1. Without recourse
(SIGNED) W. Fields
order paper.
Keetin made a special indorsement on the back of the instrument because his signature was combined with a directive as to whom the instrument would next be payable (in this case, C. Larr). As a result of this special indorsement the instrument becomes order paper, meaning that the named party’s indorsement (Larr, in this case) is now necessary to further negotiate the instrument.
(The instrument was and continues to be negotiable because all requirements for negotiability appear on the face/front of the instrument; the special indorsement has no effect on the negotiability of the instrument.)
View referenced content in book.
4232 Negotiable Instruments
Dart Corp. engaged Jay Associates, CPAs, to assist in a public stock offering. Jay audited Dart’s financial statements and gave an unqualified opinion, despite knowing that the financial statements contained misstatements. Jay’s opinion was included in Dart’s registration statement. Larson purchased shares in the offering and suffered a loss when the stock declined in value after the misstatements became known.
If Larson succeeds in the Section 11 suit against Dart, Larson would be entitled to:
damages of three times the original public offering price.
rescind the transaction.
monetary damages only.
damages, but only if the shares were resold before the suit was started.
monetary damages only.
If Larson succeeds in the Section 11 suit against Dart (issuer), the investor would be entitled to monetary damages only.
Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933 does not provide for treble damages or for rescission. There is also no requirement that the shares be resold before the suit is started.
View referenced content in book.
4132 Federal Statutory Liability
In the current year, Brown, a C corporation, has gross income (before dividends) of $900,000 and deductions of $1,100,000 (excluding the dividends-received deduction). Brown received dividends of $100,000 from a Fortune 500 corporation during the current year. What is Brown's net operating loss $100,000 $130,000 $170,000 $200,000
$170,000
Since a Fortune 500 corporation’s stock is generally widely held, this indicates that Brown owns less than 20% of its stock and qualifies for the 70% dividends-received deduction. The taxable income limitation for the dividends-received deduction does not apply since Brown has a net operating loss. Brown’s net operating loss is calculated as follows:
Income before dividends $ 900,000
Dividends 100,000
———–
Gross income 1,000,000
Deductions (1,100,000)
———–
Net operating loss before special deductions (100,000)
Dividend-received deduction ($100,000 x 70%) (70,000)
———–
Net operating loss $ (170,000)
===========
IRC Sections 243(a)(1) and 246(b)(1)–(2)
View referenced content in book.
4631 Determination of Taxable Income/Loss
Among which of the following related parties are losses from sales and exchanges not recognized for tax purposes
Father-in-law and son-in-law
Grandfather and granddaughter
Ancestors, lineal descendants, and all in-laws
Brother-in-law and sister-in-law
Grandfather and granddaughter
Losses from sales and exchanges between certain related parties are not recognized for tax purposes. Related parties are considered brother and sisters, half-brothers and half-sisters, spouses, ancestors (parents and grandparents), and lineal descendants. Relatives by marriage, or in-laws, are not considered related parties for tax purposes.
View referenced content in book.
4460 Related Party Transactions
After an S corporation elects to revoke its status as an S corporation, it must:
always wait five years before making a new election.
wait five years, but can apply to the IRS for an earlier reelection.
never reapply for S corporation status again.
wait until at least 50% of stock is owned by new shareholders.
wait five years, but can apply to the IRS for an earlier reelection.
When S corporation status is revoked (either voluntarily or through failing to meet the requirements), a corporation can apply to the IRS National Office for an early reelection. The IRS will usually grant the early reelection if ownership has changed by more than 50% or when the termination was not within their control, such as death of a shareholder and inheritance of the stock by someone who is not a U.S. citizen or resident.
View referenced content in book.
4641 Eligibility and Election
The generation-skipping transfer tax is imposed:
instead of the gift tax.
instead of the estate tax.
as a separate tax in addition to the gift and estate taxes.
on transfers of future interest to beneficiaries who are more than one generation above the donor’s generation.
as a separate tax in addition to the gift and estate taxes.
In order to keep families from avoiding the federal gift and estate tax (called the unified transfer tax) by passing wealth to younger generations (for example, the father would pass wealth directly to his great-grandchild), the Internal Revenue Code imposes an additional generation-skipping transfer tax (GSTT).
The GSTT applies to lifetime transfers by gifts made after September 25, 1985, and to transfers by death occurring after October 22, 1986. The GSTT applies to gifts made to descendants two or more generations below the donor’s generation.
View referenced content in book.
4473 Determination of Taxable Estate
According to the standards of the profession, which of the following activities would most likely not impair a CPA’s independence if otherwise allowed under Sarbanes-Oxley
Providing extensive advisory services for a non audit client
Contracting with a client to supervise the client’s office personnel
Signing a client’s checks in emergency situations
Accepting a luxurious gift from a client
Providing extensive advisory services for a non audit client
A member in public practice must be independent in the performance of professional services. Providing advisory services does not have an effect on independence if the client is not an audit client. However, supervising a client’s office personnel, signing a client’s checks, and accepting luxurious gifts from a client all impair independence.
View referenced content in book.
4121 Liability Generally
During an audit of Trent Realty Corp.’s financial statements, Clark, CPA, reviewed the following instrument:
FRONT OF INSTRUMENT BACK OF INSTRUMENT
To: Pure Bank M. West
Upton, VT
Pay to C. Larr
April 5, 20X1 T. Keetin
Pay to the order of M. West $1,500.00
One Thousand Five Hundred and 00/100 Dollars C. Larr
on May 1, 20X1. Without recourse
(SIGNED) W. Fields
Larr's indorsement makes the instrument: bearer paper. order paper. negotiable. nonnegotiable.
bearer paper.
Larr made a blank indorsement since he did not indicate the next person to whom the instrument would be payable. Pursuant to a blank indorsement, the instrument is bearer paper. The fact that Larr added “without recourse” to the indorsement does not affect whether or not the instrument is bearer paper or negotiable.
View referenced content in book.
4232 Negotiable Instruments
Wilk bought an apartment building from Dix Corp. There was a mortgage on the building securing Dix’s promissory note to Xeon Finance Co. Wilk took title subject to Xeon’s mortgage. Wilk did not make the payments on the note due Xeon, and the building was sold at a foreclosure sale. If the proceeds of the foreclosure sale are less than the balance due on the note, which of the following
statements is correct regarding the deficiency
Xeon must attempt to collect the deficiency from Wilk before suing Dix.
Dix will not be liable for any of the deficiency because Wilk assumed the note and mortgage.
Xeon may collect the deficiency from either Dix or Will.
Dix will be liable for the entire deficiency.
Dix will be liable for the entire deficiency.
If the proceeds of the foreclosure sale are less than the balance due on the note, Dix will be liable for the entire deficiency. This question tests your understanding of the liabilities involved in assuming a mortgage obligation.
The mortgage was taken out by Dix Corp. from Xeon Finance Co. When Wilk took title subject to Xeon’s mortgage, Dix was not relieved of its financial obligation under the original mortgage. The only way for Dix to be released from its financial obligation to Xeon Finance is to have the finance company release it from its obligation. When new buyers assume a mortgage, they agree to make payments on that mortgage, but that agreement does not mean that the mortgage company has released the original debtor from the obligation.
View referenced content in book.
4222 Performance
Which of the following statements related to a traditional IRA is not correct for 2014
The maximum deduction is generally $5,500 per individual.
An individual at least age 50 may deduct up to $6,500.
A 10% penalty tax applies to any withdrawal made prior to age 59-1/2.
The $5,500 maximum deduction is phased out for taxpayers with adjusted gross income over certain amounts.
A 10% penalty tax applies to any withdrawal made prior to age 59-1/2.
The 10% penalty does not apply to all withdrawals made prior to age 59-1/2. Withdrawals may be made for qualified education expenses and by first-time homebuyers with no penalty.
View referenced content in book.
4560 Taxation of Retirement Plan Benefits
White, who owned a small business that operated as a sole proprietorship, filed for bankruptcy on October 1, 20X1. Among his creditors was his sole employee, who was owed $3,000 for wages earned within the previous two months ($1,500 each month). In this case, the employee is:
a priority creditor in the amount of $1,500.
a priority creditor in the amount of $2,000.
a priority creditor in the amount of $3,000.
not a priority creditor.
a priority creditor in the amount of $3,000.
Under the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 2005 as adjusted by the indexing provisions, employees have priority status for wages earned within the prior 180 days, up to a maximum of $12,475 (indexed for inflation). In this case, the employee is given priority status for the full amount of wages earned ($3,000).
View referenced content in book.
4242 Bankruptcy and Insolvency
In 2014, Starke Corp., an accrual-basis calendar-year corporation, reported book income of $380,000. Included in that amount was $50,000 municipal bond interest income, $170,000 for federal income tax expense, and $2,000 interest expense on the debt incurred to carry the municipal bonds. What amount should Starke's taxable income be as reconciled on Starke's Schedule M-1 of Form 1120, U.S. Corporation Income Tax Return $330,000 $500,000 $502,000 $550,000
$502,000
Book income $380,000
Less:
1. Municipal bond interest income - 50,000
——–
$330,000
Add:
2. Federal income tax expense + 170,000
3. Interest expense on the debt
incurred to carry tax-exempt bonds 2,000
——–
Taxable income $502,000
========
A corporation’s Schedule M-1 (Form 1120) reconciles book income to taxable income.
- Municipal bond interest is not taxable income.
- Federal income taxes are not deductible in determining taxable income.
- No deduction is allowed for interest paid on a debt incurred or continued in order to purchase or carry tax-exempt bonds.
Corporations with over $10,000,000 in assets must use Schedule M-3.
View referenced content in book.
4621 Reconciliation of Book Income to Taxable Income
Under a contract governed by the U.C.C. Sales Article, which of the following statements is correct
Unless both the seller and the buyer are merchants, neither party is obligated to perform the contract in good faith.
The contract will not be enforceable if it fails to expressly specify a time and a place for delivery of the goods.
The seller may be excused from performance if the goods are accidentally destroyed before the risk of loss passes to the buyer.
If the price of the goods is less than $500, the goods need not be identified to the contract for title to pass to the buyer.
The seller may be excused from performance if the goods are accidentally destroyed before the risk of loss passes to the buyer.
The seller may be excused from performance if the goods are accidentally destroyed before the risk of loss passes to the buyer.
The other statements are false:
- “Unless both the buyer and seller are merchants, neither party is obligated to perform the contract in good faith.” The good faith obligation is applied to both parties.
- “The contract will not be enforceable if it fails to expressly specify a time and a place for delivery of goods.” The U.C.C. states that if delivery is not specified, then delivery is at the seller’s place of business or where the parties both know the goods are (such as a warehouse).
- “If the price of the goods is less than $500, the goods need not be identified to the contract for title to pass to the buyer.” This is an attempt to confuse you with the Statutes of Fraud provision in the U.C.C. which states that the sale of goods of $500 or more must be evidenced by a writing to be enforceable.
View referenced content in book.
4231 Sales Contracts