Who Should Engage in Asset Protection?

Asset protection is a legal method of reducing your exposure to various types of risks by placing assets into various protected structures. In addition, these structures are typically organized in a manner to minimize the negative impact of a particular event. For example, did you ever wonder why both Pepsi and Coca-Cola have bottling divisions? It minimizes liability. If there is a problem with the physical product, the bottling division will be the target of litigation. However, the intellectual property is owned by a separate structure keeping out of the defendant’s chair if the bottling division is sued. However, all businesses should consider their actual structure from the perspective of being potential litigation, which is the essence of asset protection.

In general, there are two negative situations asset protection seeks to minimize. The first is bankruptcy. Here, planners work with the bankruptcy code to help clients survive bankruptcy. However, it’s important to realize there is only so much a planner can do in this area. The bankruptcy code exemptions are very clear — and also fairly limited. The second negative event planners work at minimizing is litigation. Here we have far more flexibility (so long as there are no fraudulent transfer issues). By using various structures, it is possible to greatly reduce the negative impact of litigation. Other events that are considered in the plan are divorce (both of the client and the client’s children) death (but this falls more under estate planning) and incapacitation. 

It’s also important to understand what asset protection isn’t. Asset protection cannot create a bullet proof strategy that is unassailable in all situations – and don’t let anyone tell you differently. The most striking example is bankruptcy; as mentioned above, the bankruptcy exemptions are very clear and very narrow; anything that falls outside them is swept up in the bankruptcy estate to pay creditors. In addition, if a person does not maintain the plan, trouble can emerge. For example, a person that forms a corporation that does not keep up with corporate formalities could have the court “pierce the corporate veil,” meaning the person will become personally liable for the claim. 

Who Should Engage in Asset Protection?

All businesses should have an attorney who specializes in asset protection look at the overall business structure at least once every few years to make sure their overall structure provides maximum protection. In addition, all high net worth individuals (people with at least $1 million in net worth) should have a plan in place, as their wealth is a natural litigation target. There are also several professions that naturally benefit from asset protection planning. Doctors lead the pack, followed closely by other licensed professionals (accountants, lawyers and engineers etc..).

Lance Wallach
68 Keswick Lane
Plainview, NY 11803
Ph.: (516)938-5007
Fax: (516)938-6330
 www.vebaplan.com

National Society of Accountants Speaker of The Year

The information provided herein is not intended as legal, accounting, financial or any type of advice for any specific individual or other entity. You should contact an appropriate professional for any such advice.

Advertisements

Free Forum for Finance

Anyone may use this free forum provided by http://www.financeexperts.org
America’s Association of Leading Experts in the Legal, Financial, Accounting and Insurance Fields and Your Source of Trusted Professionals.

Finance Experts Forum

Nobody Likes Paying Taxes

March 8, 2010

In a speech last May, President Obama said, “Nobody likes paying taxes . . . . And yet, even as most American citizens and businesses meet these responsibilities, there are others who are shirking theirs.” He was referring to offshore tax havens and other loopholes that wealthy Americans often exploit to reduce their tax burden. But it doesn’t take moving money to Switzerland to avoid paying taxes. If history is any guide, 2010 will be a year in which many Americans use a few simple methods to reduce their tax liability, which could potentially cost the government billions of dollars.

This year is the last before the expiration of tax cuts originally put in place by the Bush administration. If Congress allows these tax cuts to expire, as the president supports, in 2011 the top marginal tax rates will increase from 28, 33, and 35 percent to 31, 36, and 39.6 percent.

Although it is not certain that tax rates will go up, many wealthy Americans are looking at 2010 as the end of the party. “Everybody thinks taxes are going up and tax breaks are being eliminated. Everybody’s thinking this, and they’re planning for it,” says Lance Wallach, a New York author, lecturer, and financial consultant who advises high net-worth clients, including entertainers and athletes. His phone is ringing off the hook with questions from clients about how they can take advantage of this year’s rates relative to 2011’s.

One of the most popular strategies is moving income from 2011 to this year. Usually, accountants encourage clients to postpone income so there is less income taxed in one year. But in 2010, the incentives have flipped. “This is the exact opposite. Accelerating your income makes 100 percent sense,” says Wallach.

Creative maneuvering. This would not be the first year taxpayers have pursued this strategy. In 1992, Bill Clinton was elected president with promises to raise taxes on wealthy Americans, which Congress did in 1993, boosting the top marginal rate from 31 to 39.6 percent. In late 1992, many taxpayers, expecting rates to be higher the next year because of Clinton’s victory, moved more income onto 1992’s tax return to avoid paying more with the higher rate. Robert Carroll, an economist at a Washington research organization called the Tax Foundation, estimates that about $20 billion was shifted and paid at the 31 percent rate rather than the 39.6 percent—meaning there was about $1.5 billion that the federal government did not collect in revenue.

Something similar could happen this year. “Anyone who has flexibility with income is going to try to shift their income,” says Carroll. An example of flexibility would be a business owner who gives himself or herself a bonus in December 2010 rather than January 2011.

There’s also an incentive to delay tax deductions. For example, state property and income taxes can be deducted from federal income tax returns. Wallach says he is recommending that clients hold off on paying those taxes until next year, so that the deductions can be cashed in at the higher rate.

Some may choose to delay charitable gifts for the same reason—charitable giving is tax deductible, so some taxpayers may decide to hold off on a gift they would make in 2010 and instead give a larger amount in 2011. “What we know from history, if the taxes go up, people will delay their giving,” says Nancy Raybin, chair of the Giving Institute, an association of nonprofit consultants. But Raybin says such delays usually are not significantly damaging to charities because people will often just push a gift forward a few months—from December to January, for example. “If there’s a 12-month delay, it could be a problem. But if a donor is just delaying one month, it’s not a big problem,” she says.

These tax-avoidance strategies will probably be a one-time deal for those who pursue them. A study by economist Austan Goolsbee, currently a member of the Council of Economic Advisers, found that the 1993 drop-off in reported income was temporary. Income bounced back in following years. If tax rates appear to be steady after 2011, accelerating one’s income or delaying deductions is no longer advantageous. But taxpayers will continue to look for ways to reduce their liability—they just need the time and money to find the loopholes.

Wallach says most of his clients will adjust to higher tax rates with his help. “For the very sophisticated people, there will always be loopholes,” he says, such as deducting travel and entertainment expenses. “None of my clients pay more in taxes than a schoolteacher.” For issues like these Wallach has various websites including www.taxlibrary.us .

Lance Wallach, National Society of Accountants Speaker of the Year and member of the AICPA faculty of teaching professionals, is a frequent speaker on retirement plans, financial and estate planning, and abusive tax shelters.  He writes about 412(i), 419, and captive insurance plans. He speaks at more than ten conventions annually, writes for over fifty publications, is quoted regularly in the press and has been featured on television and radio financial talk shows including NBC, National Pubic Radio’s All Things Considered, and others. Lance has written numerous books including Protecting Clients from Fraud, Incompetence and Scams published by John Wiley and Sons, Bisk Education’s CPA’s Guide to Life Insurance and Federal Estate and Gift Taxation, as well as AICPA best-selling books, including Avoiding Circular 230 Malpractice Traps and Common Abusive Small Business Hot Spots. He does expert witness testimony and has never lost a case. Contact him at 516.938.5007, wallachinc@gmail.com or visit www.taxaudit419.com.

The information provided herein is not intended as legal, accounting, financial or any type of advice for any specific individual or other entity. You should contact an appropriate professional for any such advice.

Abusive Insurance, Welfare Benefit, and Retirement Plans

 

Tax Practice: Tax Notes

March 2, 2009

 

By Lance Wallach

 

The IRS has various task forces auditing all section 419, section 412(i), and other plans that tend to be abusive.  These plans are sold by most insurance agents.  The IRS is looking to raise money and is not looking to correct plans or help taxpayers.  The fines for being in a listed, abusive, or similar transaction are up to $200,000 per year (section 6707A), unless you report on yourself.  The IRS calls accountants, attorneys, and insurance agents “material advisors” and also fines them the same amount, again unless the client’s participation in the transaction is reported.  An accountant is a material advisor if he signs the return or gives advice and gets paid.  More details can be found on http://www.irs.gov and http://www.vebaplan.com.

Bruce Hink, who has given me written permission to use his name and circumstances, is a perfect example of what the IRS is doing to unsuspecting business owners.  What follows is a story about how the IRS fines him $200,000 a year for being in what they called a listed transaction. Listed transactions can be found at http://www.irs.gov.  Also involved are what the IRS calls abusive plans or what it refers to as substantially similar.  Substantially similar to is very difficult to understand, but the IRS seems to be saying, “If it looks like some other listed transaction, the fines apply.”  Also, I believe that the accountant who signed the tax return and the insurance agent who sold the retirement plan will each be fined $200,000 as material advisors.  We have received many calls for help from accountants, attorneys, business owners, and insurance agents in similar situations.  Don’t think this will happen to you?  It is happening to a lot of accountants and business owners, because most of theses so-called listed, abusive, or substantially similar plans are being sold by insurance agents.

Recently I came across the case of Hink, a small business owner who is facing $400,000 in IRS penalties for 2004 and 2005 because of his participation in a section 412(i) plan.  (The penalties were assessed under section 6707A.)

In 2002 an insurance agent representing a 100-year-old, well established insurance company suggested the owner start a pension plan.  The owner was given a portfolio of information from the insurance company, which was given to the company’s outside CPA to review and give an opinion on.  The CPA gave the plan the green light and the plan was started.

Contributions were made in 2003.  The plan administrator came out with amendments to the plan, based on new IRS guidelines, in October 2004.

The business owner’s insurance agent disappeared in May 2005, before implementing the new guidelines from the administrator with the insurance company.  The business owner was left with a refund check from the insurance company, a deduction claim on his 2004 tax return that had not been applied, and no agent.

It took six months of making calls to the insurance company to get a new insurance agent assigned.  By then, the IRS had started an examination of the pension plan.  Asking advice from the CPA and a local attorney (who had no previous experience in these cases) made matters worse, with a “big name” law firm being recommended and over $30,000 in additional legal fees being billed in three months.

To make a long story short, the audit stretched on for over 2 ½ years to examine a 2-year-old pension with four participants and the $178,000 in contributions. During the audit, no funds went to the insurance company, which was awaiting formal IRS approval on restructuring the plan as a traditional defined benefit plan, which the administrator had suggested and the IRS had indicated would be acceptable.  The $90,000 in 2005 contributions was put into the company’s retirement bank account along with the 2004 contributions.

In March 2008 the business owner received a private e-mail apology from the IRS agent who headed the examination, saying that her hands were tied and that she used to believe she was correcting problems and helping taxpayers and not hurting people.

The IRS denied any appeal and ruled in October 2008 the $400,000 penalty would stand.  The IRS fine for being in a listed, abusive, or similar transaction is $200,000 per year for corporations or $100,000 per year for unincorporated entities.  The material advisor fine is $200,000 if you are incorporated or $100,000 if you are not.

Could you or one of your clients be next?

To this point, I have focused, generally, on the horrors of running afoul of the IRS by participating in a listed transaction, which includes various types of transactions and the various fines that can be imposed on business owners and their advisors who participate in, sell, or advice on these transactions.  I happened to use, as an example, someone in a section 412(i) plan, which was deemed to be a listed transaction, pointing out the truly doleful consequences the person has suffered.  Others who fall into this trap, even unwittingly, can suffer the same fate.

Now let’s go into more detail about section 412(i) plans.  This is important because these defined benefit plans are popular and because few people think of retirement plans as tax shelters or listed transactions.  People therefore may get into serious trouble in this area unwittingly, out of ignorance of the law, and, for the same reason, many fail to take necessary and appropriate precautions.

The IRS has warned against the section 412(i) defined benefit pension plans, named for the former code section governing them.  It warned against trust arrangements it deems abusive, some of which may be regarded as listed transactions.  Falling into that category can result in taxpayers having to disclose the participation under pain of penalties, potentially reaching $100,000 for individuals and $200,000 for other taxpayers.  Targets also include some retirement plans.

One reason for the harsh treatment of some 412(i) plans is their discrimination in favor of owners and key, highly compensated employees.  Also, the IRS does not consider the promised tax relief proportionate to the economic realities of the transactions.  In general, IRS auditors divide audited plan into those they consider noncompliant and other they consider abusive.  While the alternatives available to the sponsor of noncompliant plan are problematic, it is frequently an option to keep the plan alive in some form while simultaneously hoping to minimize the financial fallout from penalties.

The sponsor of an abusive plan can expect to be treated more harshly than participants.  Although in some situation something can be salvaged, the possibility is definitely on the table of having to treat the plan as if it never existed, which of course triggers the full extent of back taxes, penalties, and interest on all contributions that were made – not to mention leaving behind no retirement plan whatsoever.

Another plan the IRS is auditing is the section 419 plan.  A few listed transactions concern relatively common employee benefit plans the IRS has deemed tax avoidance schemes or otherwise abusive.  Perhaps some of the most likely to crop up, especially in small-business returns, are the arrangements purporting to allow the deductibility of premiums paid for life insurance under a welfare benefit plan or section 419 plan.  These plans have been sold by most insurance agents and insurance companies.

Some of theses abusive employee benefit plans are represented as satisfying section 419, which sets limits on purposed and balances of “qualified asset accounts” for the benefits, although the plans purport to offer the deductibility of contributions without any corresponding income.  Others attempt to take advantage of the exceptions to qualified asset account limits, such as sham union plans that try to exploit the exception for the separate welfare benefit funds under collective bargaining agreements provided by section 419A(f)(5).  Others try to take advantage of exceptions for plans serving 10 or more employers, once popular under section 419A(f)(6).  More recently, one may encounter plans relying on section 419(e) and, perhaps, defines benefit sections 412(i) pension plans.

Sections 419 and 419A were added to the code by the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984 in an attempt to end employers’ acceleration of deductions for plan contributions.  But it wasn’t long before plan promoters found an end run around the new code sections.  An industry developed in what came to be known as 10-or-more-employer plans.

The IRS steadily added these abusive plans to its designations of listed transactions.  With Revenue Ruling 90-105, it warned against deducting some plan contributions attributable to compensation earned by plan participants after the end of the tax year.  Purported exceptions to limits of sections 419 and 419A claimed by 10-or-more-employer benefit funds were likewise prescribed in Notice 95-24 (Doc 95-5046, 95 TNT 98-11).  Both positions were designated as listed transactions in 2000.

At that point, where did all those promoters go?  Evidence indicates many are now promoting plans purporting to comply with section 419(e).  They are calling a life insurance plan a welfare benefit plan (or fund), somewhat as they once did, and promoting the plan as a vehicle to obtain large tax deductions.  The only substantial difference is that theses are now single-employer plans.  And again, the IRS has tried to rein them in, reminding taxpayers that listed transactions include those substantially similar to any that are specifically described and so designated.

On October 17, 2007, the IRS issues Notices 2007-83 (Doc 2007-23225, 2007 TNT 202-6) and 2007-84 (Doc 2007-23220, 2007 TNT 202-5).  In the former, the IRS identified some trust arrangements involving cash value life insurance policies, and substantially similar arrangements, as listed transactions. The latter similarly warned against some postretirement medical and life insurance benefit arrangements, saying they might be subject to “alternative tax treatment.”  The IRS at the same time issued related Rev. Rul. 2007-65 (Doc 2007-23226, 2007 TNT 202-7) to address situations in which an arrangement is considered a welfare benefit fund but the employer’s deduction for its contributions to the fund id denied in whole or in part for premiums paid by the trust on cash value life insurance policies.  It states that a welfare benefit fund’s qualified direct cost under section 419 does not include premium amounts paid by the fund for cash value life insurance policies if the fund is directly or indirectly a beneficiary under the policy, as determined under sections264(a).

Notice 2007-83 targets promoted arrangements under which the fund trustee                                                         purchases cash value insurance policies on the lives of a business’s employee/owners, and sometimes key employees, while purchasing term insurance policies on the lives of other employees covered under the plan.

These plans anticipate being terminated and anticipate that the cash value policies will be distributed to the owners or key employees, with little distributed to other employees.  The promoters claim that the insurance premiums are currently deductible by the business and that the distributed insurance policies are virtually tax free to the owners.  The ruling makes it clear that, going forward, a business under most circumstances cannot deduct the cost of premiums paid through a welfare benefit plan for cash value life insurance on the lives of its employees.

Should a client approach you with one of these plans, be especially cautious, for both of you.  Advise your client to check out the promoter very carefully.  Make it clear that the government has the names of all former section 419A(f)(6) promoters and, therefore, will be scrutinizing the promoter carefully if the promoter was once active in that area, as many current section 419(e) (welfare benefit fund or plan) promoters were.  This makes an audit of your client more likely and far riskier.

It is worth noting that listed transactions are subject to a regulatory scheme applicable only to them, entirely separate from Circular 230 requirements, regulations, and sanctions.  Participation in such a transaction must be disclosed on a tax return, and the penalties for failure to disclose are severe – up to $100,000 for individuals and $200,000 for corporations.  The penalties apply to both taxpayers and practitioners.  And the problem with disclosure, of course, is that it is apt to trigger an audit, in which case even if the listed transaction was to pass muster, something else may not.

Lance Wallach, National Society of Accountants Speaker of the Year and member of the AICPA faculty of teaching professionals, is a frequent speaker on retirement plans, financial and estate planning, and abusive tax shelters.  He writes about 412(i), 419, and captive insurance plans. He speaks at more than ten conventions annually, writes for over fifty publications, is quoted regularly in the press and has been featured on television and radio financial talk shows including NBC, National Pubic Radio’s All Things Considered, and others. Lance has written numerous books including Protecting Clients from Fraud, Incompetence and Scams published by John Wiley and Sons, Bisk Education’s CPA’s Guide to Life Insurance and Federal Estate and Gift Taxation, as well as AICPA best-selling books, including Avoiding Circular 230 Malpractice Traps and Common Abusive Small Business Hot Spots. He does expert witness testimony and has never lost a case. Contact him at 516.938.5007, wallachinc@gmail.com or visit www.taxaudit419.com/TaxHelp.html and www.taxlibrary.us

The information provided herein is not intended as legal, accounting, financial or any type of advice for any specific individual or other entity. You should contact an appropriate professional for any such advice.

Listed Transactions-Excerpt from Protecting Clients From Fraud, Incompetence, and Scams

Protecting Clients From Fraud, Incompetence, and Scams

By: Lance Wallach

Published by John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Copyright 2010.  All rights reserved.

Excerpts have been taken from this book about:

Bruce Hink, who has given me permission to utilize his name and circumstances, is a perfect example of what the IRS is doing to unsuspecting business owners.  What follows is a story about Bruce Hink and how the IRS fined him $200,000 a year for being in what they called a “listed transaction”.  In addition, I believe that the accountant who signed the tax return and the insurance agent who sold the retirement plan will each be fined $200,000 as material advisors.  We have received a large number of calls for help from accountants, business owners, and insurance agents in similar situations.  Don’t think this will happen to you?  It is happening to a lot of accountants and business owners, because most of these so-called listed, abusive plans, or plans substantially similar to the so-called listed, are currently being sold by most insurance agents.

Bruce was a small business owner facing $400,000 in IRS penalties for 2004 and 2005 for his 412(i) plan (IRC6707A).  Here is how the story developed.

In 2002 an insurance agent representing a 100-year-old well-established insurance company suggested he start a pension plan.  Bruce was given a portfolio of information from the insurance company, which was given to the company’s outside CPA to review and to offer an opinion.  The CPA gave the plan the green light and the plan was started for tax year 2002.

Contributions were made in 2003.  Then the administrator came out with amendments to the plan, based on new IRS guidelines, in October 2004.

The business owner’s agent disappeared in May 2005 before implementing the new guidelines from the administrator with the insurance company.  The business owner was left with a refund check from the insurance company, a deduction claim on his 2004 tax return that had not been applied, and without an agent.

I took six months of making calls to the insurance company to get a new insurance agent assigned.  By then, the IRS had started an examination of the pension plan.  Bruce asked for advice from the CPA and the local attorney (who had no previous experience in such cases), which made matters worse, with a “big name” law firm being recommended and more than $30,000 in additional legal fees being billed in three months.

To make a long story short, the audit stretched on for more than two years to examine a two-year old pension with four participants and $178,000 in contributions.

During the audit, no funds went to the insurance company.  The company was awaiting IRS approval and restructuring the plan as a traditional defined benefit plan, which the administrator had suggested and which the IRS had indicated would be acceptable.  The $90,000 2005 contribution was put into the company’s retirement bank account along with the 2004 contribution.

In March 2008, the business owner received an apology from the IRS agent who headed the examination.  Even this sympathetic IRS agent thinks there is a problem with the IRS enforcement of these Draconian penalties.  Below is one of her emails to the business owner who was fined $400,000.

From:  XXXXXXXX XXXXX <XXXXXXXX.XXXXX@irs.gov>

Date: Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 7:12 AM

Subject: RE: Urgent

To: Bruce Hink  <brucehink@XXXXXXX.com>

Thanks Bruce – yes – please just overnight then to the Grand Rapids address.  Once again, I’m sorry about this.  Basically, our Counsel told us that we needed language specific to the IRC 6707A penalty in order for that statute to be extended.  I will ask the Reviewer to hold off an extra day.

I’m also very sorry that this is getting you down.  Deeply sorry.  It’s very difficult for me as well – before I started working on this project (412(i)) I was doing audits of 401(k) and profit sharing plans.  If there was an error on the plan, the employer would just fix it and the audit was over.  There wasn’t anything controversial about it – and I felt like I was helping people – employers and plan participants.  I really liked my job.  In two years time, that has completely changed.  I know it’s not very “professional” to make such confessions – so forgive me.  But I guess I just wanted you to know that I really sympathize with your situation – and have been doing whatever I can to help.  I know that having this hanging over your head can’t be fun – but as this project goes forward – I think that the IRS is going to have to soften their position somewhat – so these delays may be to your benefit.

Also, I’m not really supposed to be sending emails to you – but when I went through the file I couldn’t find a good phone number for you.  Could you just send me a note or an email with a current phone number?

Looking to receive the signed 872s on Thursday.  If you have any questions at any time – please call me at XXX-XXX-XXXX. I’m usually in the office in the mornings.

The IRS subsequently denied any appeal and ruled in October 2008 that the $400,000 penalty would stand.

Could You or One of Your Clients Be Next?

Some of the areas SB/SE will be examining include pass-though entities, high-income filers, and abusive transactions.  S corporations are likely to receive particular scrutiny.  Further review would not be limited to S corporations, but would extend to pass-through entities like partnerships, which can expect to receive a “significant amount of attention” because SB/SE has found an area of abuse and would like to curb what is called a growing trend of abusive high-income filers, typically classified as those with an adjusted gross income of more than $200,000.

The IRS has been cracking down on what it considers to be abusive tax shelters.  Many of them are being marketed to small business owners by insurance professionals, financial planners, and even accountants and attorneys.  I speak at numerous conventions, for both business owners and accountants.  And after I speak, I am always approached by many people who have questions about tax reduction plans that they have heard about.

I have been an expert witness in many of these 419 and 412(i) lawsuits and I have not lost one of them.  If you sold one or more of these plans, get someone who really knows what they are doing to help you immediately.  Many advisors will take your money and claim to be able to help you.  Make sure they have experience helping accountants who signed the tax returns.  IRS calls them material advisors and fines them $200,000 if they are incorporated or $100,000 if they are not.  Do not let them learn on the job, with your career and money at stake.

Lance Wallach, a member of the AICPA faculty of teaching professionals and an AICPA course developer, is a frequent and popular speaker on retirement plans, financial and estate planning, reducing health insurance costs, and tax-oriented strategies at accounting and financial planning conventions. He has authored numerous books including The Team Approach to Tax, Financial and Estate Planning, Avoiding Circular 230 Malpractice Traps and Common Abusive Small Business Hot Spots, and Sid Kess’ Alternatives to Commonly Misused Tax Strategies: Ensuring Your Client’s Future, all published by the AICPA, and Wealth Preservation Planning by the National Society of Accountants. His newest books CPAs’ Guide to Life Insurance and CPAs’ Guide to Federal and Estate Gift Taxation by Bisk CPEasy, and Protecting Clients from Fraud, Incompetence, and Scams, published by John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Mr. Wallach, CLU, CHFC, is a leading speaker on accounting and taxation topics and the author of numerous AICPA CPA exam publications.  In addition to developing CPE courses, he is also a member of the AICPA faculty of teaching professionals, and has been featured in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, Bloomberg Financial News, NBC, National Pubic Radio’s All Things Considered, and other radio talk shows.  Mr. Wallach is listed in Who’s Who in Finance and Business.

The information provided herein is not intended as legal, accounting, financial or any type of advice for any specific individual or other entity. You should contact an appropriate professional for any such advice.

New and Bestselling AICPA CPE Self-Study Courses

Best Sellers – March 2008

Avoiding Circular 230 Malpractice Traps and Common Abusive Small Business Hot Spots, by Sid Kess

Author/Moderator: Lance Wallach, CLU, CHFC, CIMC

Publisher: AICPA

This course will enable the practitioner to better understand many of the abusive insurance and annuity-based products being marketed to your clients and how you can alleviate exposure to IRS scrutiny.

Objectives:

  • Identify potentially abusive deductions claimed on your client’s tax return
  • Enable the practitioner to advise his clients so they can avoid IRS penalties and deduction disallowances
  • Learn the pros and cons of the current strategies being employed by financial professionals in developing comprehensive financial plans for individuals and businesses
  • Learn to avoid financial exposure to yourself and your clients for aggressive insurance, retirement and financial planning strategies being marketed today

Prerequisite: None

Accepted for CFP® credit.

Text Product# 733720

Availability:In Stock

Regular:$150.00

AICPA Member:$120.00

Contact Lance Wallach to purchase: 516.938.5007, wallachinc@gmail.com

Lance Wallach, National Society of Accountants Speaker of the Year and member of the AICPA faculty of teaching professionals, is a frequent speaker on retirement plans, financial and estate planning, and abusive tax shelters.  He writes about 412(i), 419, and captive insurance plans. He speaks at more than ten conventions annually, writes for over fifty publications, is quoted regularly in the press and has been featured on television and radio financial talk shows including NBC, National Pubic Radio’s All Things Considered, and others. Lance has written numerous books including Protecting Clients from Fraud, Incompetence and Scams published by John Wiley and Sons, Bisk Education’s CPA’s Guide to Life Insurance and Federal Estate and Gift Taxation, as well as AICPA best-selling books, including Avoiding Circular 230 Malpractice Traps and Common Abusive Small Business Hot Spots. He does expert witness testimony and has never lost a case. Contact him at 516.938.5007, wallachinc@gmail.com

Apply to Join FinanceExperts.org

Apply to join FinanceExperts.org, the leading organization for accounting, legal, insurance, finance, and other experts in related fields. If approved by our board,you will be allowed to co author articles written by our experts which appear in 51 national publications, be quoted in best selling books that our experts author and much much more.. In addition, business owners and high income people are referred to our experts by zip code. No more than 1000 experts are accepted as members, and no more than one expert per zip code.There are currently 17 openings. You do not have to be a member to use the financeExperts.org message forum. Email your bio to lanwalla@aol.com. If approved you will be notified.All the experts share the cost of running the organization, which is about $97 per member per year. That cost will go down for renewals, as the sponsors start paying more.

Good luck.