Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
When the Tax Cut and Jobs Act became law in December of 2017 there was a question whether some of the highest salaried employees at non-profit organizations would be exempt from the $1M remuneration tax. In the majority of states (39 out of 50), the highest salaried employees are athletic coaches. Of the 50 U.S. states, a college football or men's basketball coach were the highest-paid employee in 2016. Further Checking the Office of President University of California website the top 20 salaried employees are athletic coaches.
A position was taken by some advisers that where a state sponsored college or university was not subject to income tax based on IRC §115(1) and not §501(c) therefore the excise tax should not apply. On Dec. 31, 2018, the IRS issued interim guidance that addresses how excise tax will apply in various situations that commonly arise for tax-exempt employers. These announcements together with the Blue Book issued on Dec. 20, 2018 by the Joint Tax Committee provide clear guidance. Overall, the IRS has interpreted Section 4960 in a manner that is unfavorable to tax-exempt employers, particularly nonprofit health systems and state sponsored colleges and universities. Establishing internal systems to determine which employees are covered by this excise tax is likely to be challenging. Key highlights of Notice 2019-09 addressing Non Profit Organization executive compensations include:
The IRS issued final regulations in June 2016 and further direction with the Tax Cut and Jobs Act, the Bluebook and Notice 2019-09 that provide a roadmap for a successful solution to the excise tax conundrum. A solution applies an actuarially based methodology to provide benefits for selected non-profit executives on a tax efficient basis. If you already have a plan in place it is most likely a 457(f) plan for the executive, management and professional employees. This is not meant to replace a plan in existence, rather it compliments it as there are decided differences. Most significant for the participants is the opportunity to provide for their families, a pre-retirement death benefit without risks of forfeiture and with enormous flexibility. This is not an ERISA plan, it does not need a Trustee and the participant and plan sponsor will avoid the claims of creditors while providing for the participant's loved ones. Because this is not a qualified plan and it is not considered as deferred comp by the IRS, the plan can be self-funded and the benefit amounts can vary on a participant by participant basis. Because it follows the “top hat” rules it does not require any form of ongoing or annual filings with any regulatory agencies. A one-time e-filing with Department of Labor is the only regulatory filing. It is two pages long and does not require the listing of participants or amounts contributed.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Blockchain domain names offer decentralized alternatives to traditional DNS-based domain names, promising enhanced security, privacy and censorship resistance. However, these benefits come with significant challenges, particularly for brand owners seeking to protect their trademarks in these new digital spaces.