Blog

By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR from www.ap.org

 

Many people covered under President Barack Obama's health care law will face higher premiums next year, the administration acknowledged Thursday. While the average increases are modest, it's more fodder for the nation's political battles over health care.

Officials stressed that millions of current HealthCare.gov customers can mitigate the financial hit if they're willing to shop around for another plan in a more competitive online marketplace. Subsidies will also help cushion the impact.

It's currently taking an average of 30 minutes for returning customers to update their coverage.

Premiums for the most popular type of plan are going up an average of 5 percent in 35 states where Washington is running the health insurance exchanges this year and will do so again in 2015, said a report from the Department of Health and Human Services.

Monthly premiums are one of the most important and politically sensitive yardsticks for Obama's health care law, which offers subsidized private insurance to people who don't have access to coverage through their jobs. Sharper premium hikes were common before it passed.

The modest average increases reported for 2015 mask bigger swings from state to state, and even within regions of a state. According to data released by the administration, some communities will still see double-digit hikes while others are seeing decreases. Most are somewhere in the middle.

"Prior to the Affordable Care Act taking place, we saw double-digit increases in health care costs in this country," said White House spokesman Josh Earnest. "Those were routine."

Many people who go back to the website "will now find that their costs are limited to only 5 percent on average," he said, "a much lower cost increase than was in place before the Affordable Care Act."

Even after Thursday's report, the bottom line remains blurry.

ast year, the administration released its analysis of premiums before the start of open enrollment season. This year's snapshot came more than two weeks after sign-ups had started and covered 13 fewer states. Among the missing states were two of the largest, California and New York.

Last year's report provided average premiums for three types of plans across 48 states — close to a national number. This year's report has no comparable statistic.

With both chambers of Congress under Republican control next year, the health care law will face even closer scrutiny from opponents still pursuing its repeal.

Nonetheless, industry experts said the picture appears positive for consumers and the administration.

"Benchmark premiums going into year two of the health law are very stable nationally, driven largely by strong competition among insurers," said Larry Levitt of the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation. "How the law is playing out varies quite a bit across the country, with premiums increasing in some areas but actually going down in other places, which is almost unheard of."

Administration officials said that on the whole, the market for individual insurance has gotten better for consumers.

"In today's marketplace, issuers are competing for business," HHS Secretary Sylvia M. Burwell said in a statement. "Returning customers may find an even better deal if they shop and save."

The administration says about two-thirds of current customers can still find coverage comparable to what they have now for $100 a month or less if they shop. That estimate takes into account the tax credits that most consumers receive, which cover about three-fourths of their premiums on average.

Also, 91 percent of customers will have a choice of three or more insurers this year, with each company usually offering a range of plans. That's a notable improvement from last year, when 74 percent of customers had similar options.

The most popular coverage, known as the lowest cost silver plan, will go up 5 percent next year across the 35 states included in the administration's analysis. The second-lowest cost silver plan — the benchmark the government uses to set subsidy levels — will go up an average of 2 percent.

Tax credits are based on a person's income and the premium for the second-lowest cost silver plan in their community. The slow premium growth for the second-lowest cost silver plans is also good news for taxpayers who are subsidizing the program.

Open enrollment season for 2015 is now in its third week and runs through Feb. 15. The next big deadline for consumers is Dec. 15, the date by which new customers must sign up if they want their coverage to take effect on Jan. 1. For current customers, it's the deadline to make changes and updates that would take effect Jan. 1.

Current customers who do nothing will be automatically renewed in the plan they have now on Jan. 1. But with all the changes in premiums for 2015, administration officials and consumer advocates are urging people to come back and shop.

"For the vast majority of people, if they stay in the same plan, I think they'll see rate increases in the single digits to high single digits," said Andy Slavitt, a top HHS official overseeing technology and management issues.

The administration has set a goal of 9.1 million people enrolled in 2015, including most of the current 6.7 million customers.

 

 

By Robert Costa and Ed O'Keefe

Robert Costa is a national political reporter at The Washington Post.

 

House Republicans voted to rebuke President Obama for his unilateral overhaul of the nation’s immigration system Thursday, passing legislation to curb the White House’s ability to protect millions of people from being deported.

But the effort was largely symbolic: The Democratic-controlled Senate plans to ignore the bill, and the White House has said it would veto it.

Still, the political consequence of the bill that passed by a 219-to-197 vote (three Republicans voted present) is the bolstered standing of House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio), leaving him well positioned to pass an omnibus spending bill next week that would fund the government beyond Dec. 11, when current funds will expire. Some of the most conservative GOP members wanted to tie the immigration defunding measure to the larger government spending bill.

But Boehner’s ease in persuading his unruly conference to forgo a politically risky showdown underscores a new pragmatic streak in his ranks since the GOP’s big gains in the midterm elections.

 

Rather than governing by crisis as they have in recent years, House Republicans seem eager to move past the tumultuous lame-duck session and look ahead to January, when they will take control of both congressional chambers. They hope to pass bills on tax issues and energy policy and their own versions of immigration reform.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) defended President Obama's plan for immigration and urged members of Congress to vote on legislative reforms during a news conference on Thursday. (AP)

“We’ve learned some hard lessons since the government shutdown last year,” said Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), a Boehner ally. “People are swallowing things that are difficult to swallow on all sides of the conference.”

Rep. Ted Yoho (R-Fla.), a firebrand who voted against Boehner in the speaker election two years ago, sponsored the legislation that passed the House on Thursday. It was included as part of the GOP’s response in order to signal to hard-liners that Boehner was listening to their pleas to repudiate the president. House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.), a new member of the leadership team trusted by many conservatives, orchestrated its consideration and passage.

“We think this is the most practical way to fight the president’s action,” Boehner said at a Thursday news conference. “Frankly, we listened to our members, and we listened to some members who were frankly griping the most. This was their idea of how to proceed.”

White House press secretary Josh Earnest warned Thursday that Yoho’s bill “would actually roll back some of the president’s proposed reforms to the immigration system in a way that would actually devote law enforcement resources to deporting ‘dreamers.’ The president does not believe it is an efficient or effective use of law enforcement resources to try to separate these individuals from their families.”

Earnest questioned why the House GOP was taking the time to pass a measure to “roll back” the president’s initiatives rather than voting on a bipartisan immigration bill passed by the Senate last year. “It’s a little nonsensical for them to be pursuing this course of action but not inconsistent with their previous strategy.”

But Thursday’s vote is only the first step in Boehner’s two-part immigration strategy. Before next week’s vote on the spending bill, the leadership is reassuring conservatives that the immigration fight is only beginning and courting Democrats to support the spending bill.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Thursday that she is open to backing Boehner if Republicans don’t shift the legislation to curry favor with conservatives in the coming days.

“We want to work together to pass a bill to keep government open as we had to supply the votes last year to open up government,” Pelosi said at a news conference. “Let us supply the votes to keep government open. But we can’t do it unless we have a bill that is worthy of our support.”

Boehner’s package, which the speaker outlined this week in a meeting with GOP members, would include 11 of the 12 appropriations bills, except for the Department of Homeland Security, which has jurisdiction over immigration enforcement. DHS would be funded only through February to ensure that immigration remains at the fore of the national debate by forcing Congress to again deal with immigration in a few months.

Boehner didn’t rule out stripping the immigration-related funding from the DHS budget. “We’ve had limited options in terms of how we can deal with this. But there are options, and we’re going to continue to pursue this,” he said at the news conference.

Aides said Boehner is treading carefully as he rounds up votes for the spending bill. Republican leaders are keeping tabs on the scope of conservative fury and the various demands being made by members. Some have called on Boehner to not invite Obama to deliver the State of the Union address next year; others have suggested cutting the budgets for White House operations.

But on Thursday, Boehner dismissed such chatter. Asked whether he might not invite Obama to give a State of the Union address, he said: “Listen, the more the president talks about his ideas, the more unpopular he becomes. Why would I want to deprive him of that opportunity?”

 

BY JACKIE PERLMAN AND ALISON FLORES from Accoutingtoday.com

 

As the result of a recent court ruling, college football and basketball stars may soon share in the big money brought to their schools through college athletics, but there hasn’t been much discussion about the tax implications this case could have on college athletes’ tax-free education and the many perks they receive. In O’Bannon et al. v. NCAA, a judge for the Federal District Court for the Northern District of California ruled that NCAA regulations barring payments to college athletes were in violation of antitrust laws. The lead plaintiff in the class-action lawsuit was former U.C.L.A. basketball player Ed O’Bannon. More than 10 years after graduation, O’Bannon discovered that his likeness was being used on a video game, without his consent or compensation, and he accordingly filed suit.

The court ruled in favor of O’Bannon, allowing colleges with football teams in the Top 10 conferences and colleges with Division I men’s basketball teams to offer recruits a share of:

  • Revenues generated from the use of the recruits’ names, images and likenesses while they are in school. The NCAA can cap this compensation while the student-athlete is enrolled in school, and the compensation can be in addition to a full “grant-in-aid” (generally, a full scholarship).
  • Licensing revenue, to be deposited annually into trust funds for the student-athletes and paid to the recruits when they leave school or when their eligibility expires. The NCAA can cap the amount of money that can be contributed annually to the trust funds, and schools can offer lower amounts if they choose.

This ruling is set to go into effect in July of 2016 and applies only to Football Bowl Subdivision football recruits and Division I basketball recruits. The NCAA is appealing the ruling.

Commentators have discussed how this decision could affect college sports, amateurism, TV audiences’ viewing choices, recruiting competitiveness and fairness, higher education budgets, the NCAA’s tax-exempt status, and the fate of the NCAA altogether. For the student-athletes themselves, the ruling may have unintended tax consequences.  

 

Background on scholarships and tax

Qualified scholarships are excluded from gross income under IRC Section 117, which means that the recipient does not pay tax on the scholarship funds. To get this tax-free treatment:

  • The student must be a degree candidate at an eligible educational organization; and,
  • The scholarship must be used for qualified expenses.

Qualified expenses are tuition and fees, as well as books, supplies and equipment required for coursework. Room and board, travel, and other costs are not qualified expenses.

 

Services to the school

Under the law, if the student is required to perform services for the school to receive the scholarship (laboratory research, for instance), the funds attributable to the services provided to the school are equivalent to taxable wages (with limited exceptions). Treas. Reg. Section 1.117-4 also emphasizes this point.

This type of restrictive language in the law and regulations raises questions about whether an athletic scholarship really qualifies as true educational assistance, or crosses the line as payment for services to the school.

 

Room and board

According to a nearly 38-year-old IRS ruling (Rev. Rul. 77-263), an athletic scholarship is nontaxable only under the following conditions:

  • The scholarship does not exceed expenses for tuition, fees, room, board, and necessary supplies.
  • The school expects but does not require the student to participate in a particular sport.
  • The school does not require any particular activity in lieu of participation and doesn’t cancel the scholarship if the student cannot participate.

The first condition in this ruling does not mean that an athletic scholarship can be used to provide students with tax-free room and board. Rather, it means that the total scholarship awarded (both taxable and non-taxable portions) must not exceed the total cost of attending the school. If this and the other two conditions are met, then the portion of the athletic scholarship covering qualified expenses will be tax-free and not treated as payment for services.

IRS Pub. 970, Tax Benefits for Education, bears this out: Athletic scholarship recipients are referred to the same worksheet used by all scholarship recipients to determine the taxable and nontaxable parts of scholarship funds received.

 

What could change

Few students who apply for athletic scholarships get one at all, much less get one of the limited number of full-ride athletic scholarships doled out each year. According to some reports, the odds of a high school athlete getting any sports scholarship are only 2%. For most of these students, the scholarship covers only a fraction of their costs.

But what about the few star athletes who play basketball or football for one of the top college conferences and manage to get a high-dollar or full-ride scholarship? While we may know that they get much more than “regular” students – and that their many perks are not just dorm rooms and cafeteria vouchers – scholarships for these students are not called out for any special treatment in the Tax Code, limited IRS guidance, or even in the Internal Revenue Manual. Perhaps this could change.

 

The tax implications

The O’Bannon decision refers to student-athletes’ share of revenue from the use of their names and likenesses as “compensation.” It is difficult to see how reporting this type of compensation as anything other than taxable income could ever be justified.

Students’ share of licensing revenue would likewise have to be treated as taxable compensation. The fact that deposits might be made to trusts does not necessarily mean that the funds won’t be immediately taxable. Although athletes may not have access to the trust funds while they are in school, the athletes would likely be taxed when the compensation is paid to the trust. And interest earned on the trust funds will certainly be taxable in the year earned. With all of this extra scrutiny, the other perks of being a star college athlete – travel, guest passes, gear, health care – might just show up on a Form 1098-T in the scholarship and grant box one day.

Finally, just as with medical residents, the very notion that the star player is really a student first and athlete second – rather than a paid employee of the school – will continue to be called into question. Although they may not see it in that light, the athletes themselves may cast doubt on their own student status. Consider student-athletes’ interest in forming labor unions, the NCAA’s approval of unlimited meals, and other changes in the news this year.

It remains to be seen what will happen in 2016. The NCAA could win on appeal. And schools and conferences would have a lot to consider when deciding what to offer future recruits. Stay tuned.

The New York State Department of Taxation and Finance has launched a continuing education program as part of the state’s efforts to regulate tax preparers. 

 The new training program aims to ensure that—for the first time in New York history—those who prepare taxes for others are adequately trained. The program is part of New York’s consumer protection initiative to improve the overall standards of the tax preparation industry and protect taxpayers from misrepresentation, errors and fraud, according to officials with the tax department.Each year, the Department of Taxation and Finance processes more than 10 million individual tax returns, with approximately 70 percent of them completed and filed by paid tax preparers.

“Clearly tax preparers have a huge influence on their clients’ financial well-being,” said Commissioner of Taxation and Finance Thomas H. Mattox in a statement Tuesday. “Accurate tax returns are required to access many financial products and services, including home mortgages and college financial assistance. Prior to New York’s regulations, there was no minimum education standard in place to ensure tax preparers received the training they needed each year to accurately prepare their customers’ tax returns.”

Tax preparers who complete 10 or more New York State personal income tax returns a year are considered “commercial preparers” and must complete continuing education requirements. Experienced commercial preparers take four hours of training while inexperienced commercial preparers take 16 hours. Continuing education requirements include state and federal tax code changes, standards of conduct and other critical topics.

CPAs, attorneys and enrolled agents are subject to the Treasury Department’s Circular 230 professional standards. Therefore they, as well as their supervised employees, are not required to register with the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance or complete the continuing education requirements.

Generally speaking, all other paid tax preparers—including those employed by tax preparation companies—are required to register with New York State.

The tax department also announced Tuesday that 2015 tax preparation registration is now available online atwww.tax.ny.gov.

The tax department has created a searchable database to confirm that a tax prepare has registered with the department if required to do so. An interactive map is also available for locating registered preparers.

New York is one of only four states to regulate the tax preparer industry, the others being California, Oregon and Maryland. The Internal Revenue Service had tried to mandate continuing education and testing for tax preparers nationally as part of its efforts to regulate the tax preparation profession, but a federal judge ruled last year that the IRS had exceeded its statutory authority in imposing the Registered Tax Return Preparer program. After losing an appeal earlier this year, the IRS instead is rolling out a voluntary testing and continuing education program known as the Annual Filing Season program.

For a summary of the regulations in New York State, click here.

credit card fraud

 

Credit card fraud is a broad term for theft and fraud committed using a credit card. Usually, it’s associated with stolen or compromised information and unauthorized credit card charges, but sometimes it’s the legal cardholder who’s unintentionally committing the crime.

Credit card fraud law covers a wide range of activity, and the terms and conditions of credit cards are lengthy and difficult to understand. Combine both of those and it makes sense that consumers can unknowingly break the law.

Committing credit card fraud, whether it’s on purpose or by accident, can carry legal and financial consequences and might impact your ability to obtain future credit or even open a bank account. Keep the law on your side by knowing what to watch out for.

 

1. Using someone else’s credit card.

 

If you use someone else’s card without permission, it’s fraud. Everyone knows that. But there are similar situations that aren’t illegal but do break the terms of your contract with the card issuer. For example, just giving someone permission to use your card, signing a credit card slip on behalf of a user, or simply allowing someone to punch in your credit card numbers to help make a purchase are all deal breakers.

When you break the terms of your agreement with a creditor, you can’t dispute any of the activity or make claims against those charges. As far as the creditors are concerned, it’s your problem. That’s something to think about the next time Grandma needs help ordering something off Amazon.

 

2. Using a fake credit card number to sign up for a free trial online.

 

Want to sign up for a free trial of an online service or samples of a product? You’ll probably have to provide a credit card number, which will eventually get charged if you forget to cancel your service — which is likely. There are several sites that offer “fake” credit card numbers for people who just want to sign up for free trials online or receive samples without providing any real payment information. These sites claim the credit card number is 100 percent fake and won’t pass a verification test if the website runs one.

The legality of this practice is debatable. California Penal Code 532a, “Theft by False Pretenses,” does contain some language that some people feel applies to using fake credit card numbers. Though the sites giving away these numbers claim they are operating within the law, it’s difficult to separate the supposedly legitimate sites from the shady ones. You’ll risk unknowingly using a stolen card number or unintentionally breaking the law.

Even if the fake credit card number is legal to use, you could be breaking the terms and conditions on the site offering the free trial. It’s best to stay on the safe side and just use your regular, valid credit card and set a reminder to cancel your subscription before you get charged.

Related: How to Dispute Fraudulent Credit Card Charges With Banks and Creditors

 

3. Disputing your own credit card charges.

 

Chargeback fraud, also known as “friendly fraud,” happens when a consumer makes an online purchase with his credit card and then calls the card issuer and requests a refund, citing fraud. The bank refunds the money and the consumer keeps the goods, leaving the merchant on the hook for the cash.

In some cases, the consumer forgets which charges he made and in some, he’s intentionally committing fraud. Before you head down this road, make sure the charge wasn’t yours. It’s hard to remember every little transaction and some retailer transactions look unfamiliar on statements. For example, third-party payments systems, like PayPal, use the merchant’s name.

One of these is an honest mistake; the other is outright fraud. If you are intentionallycommitting chargeback fraud, it’s ends up costing retailers $11.8 billion a year, which will eventually get passed down to consumers. And it’s 100 percent illegal — you are exposing yourself to a host of consequences, including jail time.

Related: Counterfeit Credit Card Fraud Targets Poor Credit Consumers

 

4. Lying on your credit card application.

 

Mistakes happen, but intentionally giving false information, like your age or income, on a credit card application can land you in legal trouble, including being charged with theft by deception and larceny. Penalties vary, but can include: fines, probation, community service or jail time. You can even face criminal charges – especially if you end up defaulting.

Kim McGrigg, manager of community and media relations for Money Management International, told Fox Business, “Lying on a credit application purposefully is fraud. It may not be prosecuted aggressively, but the potential is too great for people to risk being caught.”

Even if you don’t face legal action, there are other consequences to consider: interest rate spikes, closed accounts, poor credit history or the inability to open a bank account. The bottom line: It doesn’t pay to lie on an application just to get a higher credit limit or better terms.

 

Crowe Horwath LLP has introduced the Crowe International Tax Manager, a Web-based automated information gathering tool that helps streamline tax-reporting processes.Crowe developed the system to help business clients in various industries deal with their international tax compliance obligations, reduce tax-processing costs and adapt to emerging areas of risk.

The Internal Revenue Service requires U.S.-based multinational organizations to file a number of forms detailing their international activities, such as Form 5471, “Foreign Corporations,” Form 8858, “Foreign Disregarded Entities”; Form 926, “Transfer of Property to a Foreign Corporation,” and Form 8865, “Foreign Partnerships,” among others. Crowe tax specialists collect demographic information from clients to determine which of the filing requirements apply. Once the filing requirements have been determined, the Crowe International Tax Manager can be populated with data from existing systems and spreadsheets. From there, designated users can log into the system and import or enter any extra data needed to complete the required forms. A project leader can assign tasks, keep track of progress and review the overall filing status from the system’s dashboard. “Multiple users can work within the solution at the same time, benefiting from a divide-and-conquer strategy,” said Crowe international tax partner John Kelleher in a statement. “While an individual only sees the portion he or she is responsible for, the leader is able to view the entire project and maintain control.”

Other features include automated requests that eliminate time-consuming questionnaire distribution and tracking, enabling the applicable forms to be completed for any number of foreign entities. Delegation features allow managers to assign tasks, track progress and review status.

A dynamic review feature flags inconsistencies in the imported or entered data. Information requests can follow a specified workflow to translate the IRS’s requirements into a uniform format for filing.

Data transfer features populate the applicable tax forms in real time, and the forms can then be reviewed in Adobe Acrobat PDF format. Security features protect sensitive information through application-layer security based on unique permissions assigned to users.

For more information, visit www.crowehorwath.com/international-tax-nr/.