• Skip to content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Header Right

  • Home
  • About
  • Contact

Jeffrey Urbach

Tax Planning for Divorce

July 31, 2019 by Jeffrey Urbach

If you are getting a divorce, taxes are probably not highest on your list of concerns. Still, you should consider a number of tax-related issues.

Property Settlements

Dividing property in connection with a divorce generally has no immediate consequences for either spouse. However, if the spouse who receives property in the divorce settlement later sells it, there may be a gain to report for tax purposes. So, potential taxes should be a consideration in deciding which spouse will receive which property.

Note that a spouse who receives property in a divorce figures any gain on a subsequent sale of the property using the transferring spouse’s basis (e.g., cost), not the property’s value when it was received.

For example: Michelle receives 10 acres of unimproved land in her divorce settlement. Her ex-husband bought the land for $25,000. It’s now worth $100,000. If Michelle sells the land for $100,000, she will have to report a taxable gain of $75,000 (the difference between the $100,000 selling price and the $25,000 cost basis).

Personal Residence

If a divorcing couple sells their home while they are still married, they are entitled to exclude up to $500,000 of gain from their taxable income if otherwise eligible for the exclusion. If the ownership of the home is simply transferred to one spouse as part of the divorce settlement, there is no taxable gain or loss at the time of transfer. However, should that spouse later sell the house while he or she is unmarried, only a $250,000 exclusion would be available.

Retirement Benefits

A divorce settlement often determines how retirement plan benefits will be divided. However, an employer may distribute retirement plan benefits to a former spouse only after receiving a court-issued document that meets the requirements for a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO). The benefits are taxable to the former spouse who receives them pursuant to a QDRO.

Dependency Exemptions

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 suspended the deduction for dependency exemptions for 2018 through 2025. But after 2025, the deduction will apply (unless additional changes are made). While the spouse who has legal custody of a child is generally entitled to claim the dependency exemption, this tax advantage is negotiable and can change from year to year. The custodial spouse can waive his or her right to the exemption, allowing the noncustodial spouse to claim it.

Does it still matter which spouse qualifies for the dependency exemption? Although the deduction for the dependency exemption is suspended through 2025, there are still benefits to the spouse qualifying for the child’s dependency exemption. Certain tax credits are available such as the child tax credit, (see below) child care credit and tuition credit generally to the spouse entitled to the exemption. Also, many states have a deduction for dependents.

Other Tax Benefits

Having a child qualify as a dependent may impact other tax benefits. For example, there is a potential child tax credit of up to $2,000 annually for each qualifying dependent child under age 17.

Alimony vs. Child Support

For 2018, payments that qualify as alimony under the tax law are deductible by the paying spouse and are considered taxable income to the recipient spouse. Child support payments, on the other hand, are not deductible by the paying spouse and are not included in the recipient spouse’s income. The IRS characterizes payments that are linked to an event or date relating to a child — such as high school graduation or a 21st birthday — as child support rather than alimony.

Note that the tax treatment of alimony will be different for taxpayers who divorce after 2018. Under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, no deduction is available for alimony payments made under post-2018 divorce or separation agreements and recipients are not required to include the payments in income.

These are just some of the tax planning issues that could be important in a divorce situation. Be sure to consult us to discuss how these general rules pertain to your personal situation.

Filed Under: Alimony, DIVORCE FORUM, Taxes Tagged With: Alimony, Divorce

Connecticut Rules Against Double Dip in Determining Alimony

July 29, 2019 by Jeffrey Urbach

The “Anti-Steneken” Decision

On May 21, 2019 The Appellate Court of Connecticut ruled against the “double dip” in the case of PENNY OUDHEUSDEN v. PETER OUDHEUSDEN. The decision takes the opposite position of the New Jersey Appellate Court in 2004 in Steneken v. Steneken, 367 N.J. Super. 427 (App. Div. 2004) which decided the “double dip” was permissible.

So, what is the “double dip”? According to NJ attorneys Charles F. Vuotto and Lisa Steinman:

The “double-dip” refers to the double counting of a marital asset, once in the property division and again in the alimony award. More specifically, where a court uses a business owner’s “excess earnings” to value the interest in the business and also fixes support on that spouse’s total income (inclusive of the “excess earnings” used to value the business), a “double-dip” occurs. The tacit acceptance (by some) of a rule against the “double-dip” served to ameliorate the harsh result of distributing undiscounted business values while also fixing alimony on the same income stream used to value a business. However, the recent decision of Steneken, has submerged the availability of a rule against the “double-dip”.

Could this impact NJ divorce law? As of this writing we don’t know if the decision will be appealed to the Connecticut Supreme Court.  As forensic accountants and non-attorneys, we don’t know if New Jersey attorneys, using an out of state case, can try and overturn Steneken – something that would require a New Jersey Supreme Court Decision presumably on a new matter. That effort would take years and thousands of dollars in legal and expert fees. For the right case with enough dollars at stake it may make sense.

If you would like a copy of the PENNY OUDHEUSDEN v. PETER OUDHEUSDEN decision email Jeffrey D. Urbach, partner at jdu1@ua-cpas.com.  Jeff has been providing Court related litigation support services for over thirty years. He is a NJ Roster Rule 1:40 Mediator and is trained in Collaborative Law. Jeff is a CPA, ABV (Accredited in Business Valuations by the AICPA) and a CVA (Certified Valuation Analyst by the NACVA) among other advanced designations.

 

Filed Under: Alimony, Business Valuations, DIVORCE FORUM Tagged With: Alimony, Divorce

Family Business Changes of Ownership & Estate Planning

November 3, 2016 by Jeffrey Urbach

By: Jeffrey D. Urbach, CVA, CPA/ABV/CFF

Business owners have been saving estate taxes by transferring assets in the form of FLPs (Family Limited Partnerships)

Family Business

or outright gifts of company stock to family members.
The tax savings are the result of discounts taken by business appraisers on the value of the gift.

The IRS is proposing to disallow these discounts as of Jan. 1, 2017.
Based on many published surveys, selling a non-controlling interest can result in a 30 to 40% (or more) total discount off the value of the company because of the combination of the following two discounts.
These discounts are commonly called Minority (or Control) Discounts and DLOM (Discounts for Lack of Marketability).
A simple example:
Company A is worth $10,000,000 and 100% of the shares are owned by Mr. Smith. Assume he wants to gift 1/3 of the company to his daughter. The appraiser valued the company at $10,000,000 and in her judgment, the gift would warrant a combined Marketability and Control discount of 40%.
On the face of it, a 1/3 interest of a $10,000,000 is $3.3 Million. After application of the 40% discount ($1.32 Million), the value of the gift becomes $1.98 Million. ($3.3 million less $1.32 Million, or $1.98 million).
In the end, Mr. Smith removes $3.3 of value from his taxable estate and pays a Gift Tax on $1.98 million, say roughly 40% or $790,000. The same 1/3 interest, if left in his estate would have incurred a tax of $1.3 Million ($3.3 Million times 40%).
The gift saved his family $510,000 ($1.3 Million less $790,000).
The new IRS proposals to disallow these discounts may take effect on January 1, 2017. You should consult with your estate attorney and other financial advisors ASAP and to have a strategy in place when and if this change occurs.

Filed Under: BUSINESS FORUM, Estate Taxes, ESTATE, TRUST, GUARDIANSHIP, Taxes Tagged With: Business Valuations, Estate Taxes

Gift Tax Valuations enjoy new IRS Loophole

September 27, 2011 by Jeffrey Urbach

With the current low asset values and the estate/ gift- tax exemption slated to be reduced to $1 million in 2013 (from its current $5 million level), many are considering sheltering their assets by making large gifts. A prevalent concern is the valuation of these large gifts. What if the IRS challenges your estimate and wants more gift taxes? In Estate of Petter vs Commisioner, a popular technique to sidestep gift taxes was affirmed. [Read more…] about Gift Tax Valuations enjoy new IRS Loophole

Filed Under: Business Valuations, Business Valuations, ESTATE, TRUST, GUARDIANSHIP, LITIGATION SUPPORT Tagged With: Business Valuations, Gift Taxes

Tax Fraud in NJ Divorce Case Reported to IRS

July 31, 2011 by Jeffrey Urbach

What began as a motion in a divorce case by defendant Chinelo Onyiuke to relocate her children to Maryland resulted in the discovery of fictitious child care expenses deducted on her ex-husband’s personal tax returns. David and Chinelo were divorced in May 2007 with two children. In June 2009, Chinelo filed a motion to relocate with her children to Maryland for both financial and personal reasons.  [Read more…] about Tax Fraud in NJ Divorce Case Reported to IRS

Filed Under: DIVORCE FORUM, Fraud, LITIGATION SUPPORT, Tax Fraud Tagged With: Divorce, Tax Fraud

Unreported Income Disclosed to IRS in Divorce Case

July 25, 2011 by Jeffrey Urbach

Patricia Spence V.S. Walter Guy Chalow

Patricia, the plaintiff, and Walter, the defendant, were divorced in January 1995, with two children. The PSA (property settlement agreement) incorporated into their final judgment a child support obligation upon the defendant of $150 week. The PSA noted that this amount was not “based on the child support guidelines because both parties are self-employed”(Walter was a contractor; Patricia, a “credit searcher”)  their incomes fluctuate and cannot be precisely determined.”  The court determined that the defendant’s annual income was $153,199 and set a child support obligation of $267 per week.

[Read more…] about Unreported Income Disclosed to IRS in Divorce Case

Filed Under: DIVORCE FORUM, LITIGATION SUPPORT, Unreported Income Tagged With: Divorce, Unreported Income

  • Page 1
  • Page 2
  • Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

Search

Category

  • Alimony
  • Alternative Dispute Resolution
  • Alternative Dispute Resolution
  • BUSINESS FORUM
  • Business Valuations
  • Business Valuations
  • Business Valuations
  • Diversion of Assets
  • DIVORCE FORUM
  • Elder Care
  • Employee Classification
  • Estate Taxes
  • ESTATE, TRUST, GUARDIANSHIP
  • Financial Abuse of Elderly
  • Fraud
  • Guardianships
  • Hot Topics
  • Income Taxes
  • Income Taxes
  • Joint Accounts
  • LITIGATION SUPPORT
  • Management
  • MEDICAL PRACTICES
  • NJ Assistance
  • Non-Profits
  • OSHA Requirements
  • Overtime Pay
  • Payroll Taxes
  • Property Settlement Agreements
  • Sales Tax
  • Social Media
  • STAFFING AGENCIES
  • Tax Fraud
  • TAX TIPS FOR INDIVIDUALS
  • Taxes
  • Taxes
  • Taxes
  • Taxes
  • Uncategorized
  • Unreported Income
  • Wage & Hour Violations
  • Wills- Probate

Copyright © 2011 · https://www.ua-cpas.com/blog