Taxing Lessons From Court Decisions

Decisions — School Math Day

Thanks for sharing!
2 minute read
Image source: www.wpclipart.com
Image source: www.wpclipart.com

Writer Ambrose Bierce defined a day as a period of twenty-four hours, mostly misspent. In tax law, thanks to “timing rules,” misspending during those twenty-four hours can mean the difference between benefiting from a credit or losing it.

For example, take the American opportunity education tax credit timing rule. The credit is allowed only for payments of qualified tuition and related expenses for an academic period beginning in the same taxable year as the year the payment is made (Regulation 1.25A-5(e)(1)). When you’re a cash basis taxpayer, qualified tuition expenses are usually treated as paid in the same year you actually pay them.

The timing rule for this credit also contains an extension called the “prepayment” rule. Under the extension, you can claim the credit when you pay qualified tuition and related expenses during one taxable year for an academic period that begins during the first three months of your next taxable year. You have to take the credit on your federal income tax return in the taxable year in which you make the payment.

In T.C. Summary Opinion 2014-115 (Ferm), the taxpayer made three payments toward the spring 2011 tuition for his daughter: $2,150.85 on December 28, 2010; $50 on January 3, 2011; and $165.45 on May 6, 2011. The taxpayer claimed an American opportunity credit of $2,107 on his 2011 tax return, based on the total qualifying expenses.

While agreeing the December 2010 payment was for tuition expenses, the IRS disallowed the part of the credit related to that payment because it was not made in 2011.

Based on the timing rule, do you think the tax court agreed with the or the ?

***

Other posts you might enjoy

Decisions — Incoming Gift   Image source: lucas Favre on Unsplash   Pastors get by with a little help from parishioners. But is that help a gift? Or taxable income? In T.C. Memo. 2018-168 (Felton), parishioners gave their pastor over $200,000 in cash and personal checks in addition to regular church of...
Decisions — To be fair   Image source: Library of Congress Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons   All may be fair in love and war, but that's not necessarily true in taxes. In TC Memo 2018-117 (Grainger), the taxpayer made noncash charitable donations and claimed a deduction for what she believed wa...
Decisions — Who’s included?   Image source: openclipart.org   Back in 2012, the tax court decided a case typically referred to as WHO515. In that case, the question was whether certain partnership tax items were included when a taxpayer agreed to an extension of the statute of limitations for a personal fed...
Decisions — Sharing the credit Image source: Photo by Sharas Kveder on Unsplash   You may be amazed by what you can accomplish if you don't care who gets the credit, but that's probably not the best argument to make in tax court. In T.C. Memo. 2018-81 (Caselli), the taxpayer was one of three shareholders in a subch...
Sorry, wrong answer :(
Right answer!

The IRS does not dispute the taxpayer paid qualified tuition and related expenses in December 2010 for the academic period beginning January 2011. The taxpayer was therefore entitled to an American opportunity credit with respect to this payment, if at all, for taxable year 2010.

Neither the statute nor the regulations permit a cash method taxpayer an American opportunity credit with respect to a year other than the taxable year in which the payment was actually made. Accordingly, the taxpayer is not entitled to a credit for taxable year 2011 with respect to the December 2010 payment of $2,150.85.

We realize the statutory requirements may seem to work a harsh result in a case such as this where a four-day delay in making the December 2010 payment would have engendered a different result. However, the court must apply the statute as written and follow the accompanying regulations when consistent therewith.

Tagged