Click here to listen to the audio. Alternatively, you may download the file to your computer by right clicking your mouse, choosing "Save Target As", then selecting a location on your computer to save the file.

Lynn Nichols delivers the update this week on the latest changes in the federal tax area.  You still have an opportunity to take CPE on the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 at http://www.ficpa.org/Content/CPE/Online/LiveWebcasts.aspx. This week the podcast covers:

1. Couple's Income Taxes Were Not Dischargeable in Bankruptcy
   (Edson Pamittan Mallo v. U. S.; US Bk CO; No. 11-01624; 1/3/2013
   A U.S. bankruptcy court held that a couple's returns filed after the IRS had filed substitutes for returns and assessed taxes against them didn't constitute returns for bankruptcy purposes and that their tax liabilities were excepted from discharge. [Doc 2013-251]
   
   
2. Chart Shows Changes to Employee Plans Compliance Resolution System
   (Chart of Significant Changes to EPCRS; www.irs.gov; 1/3/2013)
   The IRS has posted to its website a chart that identifies significant changes to the Employee Plans Compliance Resolution System under Rev. Proc. 2013-12. [Doc 2013-295]
   
   
3. PwC Memo Explains Tax Treatment of Depreciable Property
   (PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP report; 1/7/2013)
   Although the effective date of temporary tangible property regulations has been delayed until 2014, taxpayers may apply the temporary regs for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2012, and should consider early adoption, according to a January 7 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP report. [Doc 2013-356]
   
   
4. Law Firm Must Turn Over Client Records in Response to IRS Summons
   (United States v. Sideman & Bancroft LLP; CA 9; No. 11-15930; 1/8/2013)
   The Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court decision that enforced an IRS summons against a law firm in the criminal investigation of one of the firm's clients, finding that the court didn't err in finding that the summoned documents fell within the foregone conclusion exception to the Fifth Amendment. [Doc 2013-444]
   
   
5. Couple Liable for Deficiencies, Penalties Stemming from S Corp Income
   (John Chong-Man Kim et ux. v. Comm.; T.C. Memo. 2013-5; 1/9/2013)
   The Tax Court held that a couple underreported income from an S corporation and were liable for deficiencies and accuracy-related penalties, finding that they failed to show reasonable cause for the underpayment or that they acted in good faith. [Doc 2013-568]
   
   
6. Couple Liable for Accuracy-Related Penalty
   (Ronald S. Mills et ux. v. Comm.; T.C. Memo. 2013-4; 1/9/2013)
   The Tax Court held a couple liable for an accuracy-related penalty on a tax deficiency stemming from flow-through income from their companies, finding that they failed to show that their accountant was a competent adviser, that they gave him accurate and complete information, and that they relied on his advice in good faith. [Doc 2013-569]