• Posts by Mark E. Sims
    Partner

    Mark Sims practices in the Business Representation & Transactions Group and works primarily in the federal income tax, business planning and healthcare areas. Mark's federal tax practice involves individual, corporate, S ...

The Internal Revenue Service has issued additional guidance regarding the qualified business income deduction under Code Section 199A in the form of a notice.  Notice 2019-07 contains a proposed revenue procedure that provides for a safe harbor, solely for purposes of Code Section 199A, under which certain rental real estate enterprises will be treated as a trade or business. For more information on this and other U.S. federal income tax issues, please contact Drew Griesser at 513-639-3909, Margaret Kubicki at 513-579-6913 or Mark Sims at 513-579-6966.

On September 29, 2018, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) announced that CEO and Chairman of Tesla, Elon Musk, had agreed to settle securities fraud charges brought by the SEC and that Tesla had agreed to settle SEC charges that it failed to have required disclosure controls and procedures covering Mr. Musk’s tweets.

The United States Supreme Court decided on June 21, 2018, in South Dakota v. Wayfair, that a South Dakota law that requires certain out-of-state vendors to collect and remit sales tax as if the vendor had a physical presence in the State does not violate the Commerce Clause.

While KMK continues to grow its expertise in leading New Markets Tax Credits financing deals for many types of significant projects and as we expand our work in EB-5 financing deals, P3s and PRIs, we are surprised by the number of communities in some parts of the country still unfamiliar with the tremendous financing horsepower of NMTCs.  Here is a quick highlight of this extremely valuable financing tool.

In a June 25, 2012 revenue ruling, the IRS issued guidance as to whether dividends and dividend equivalents related to restricted stock and restricted stock units (RSUs) that qualify as performance-based compensation for purposes of Internal Revenue Code Section 162(m) must separately qualify as performance-based. 

Tags: IRS

This blog post focuses only on how the Supreme Court’s decision affects businesses in their capacity as “employer” and administrator of their group health plans.  This post does not address the many significant issues that may be faced by hospitals, health care providers, drug and medical device manufacturers, health insurers or state governments.

The Supreme Court’s Decision

On June 28, the Supreme Court released its decision in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius.  The Court ruled on various issues, including the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’s “individual mandate” and “Medicaid expansion” provisions.

Code Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code") precludes a tax deduction for remuneration paid to certain employees of publicly held companies in excess of $1,000,000.  On June 23, 2011 the IRS issued proposed regulations under Code Section 162(m) to clarify two provisions of existing treasury regulations. 

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act adds a new provision to the Internal Revenue Code that could provide a significant benefit to small and mid-size companies in the biotechnology industry.  The Act, which was signed by President Obama on March 23, authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to award up to $1 billion in qualifying therapeutic discovery project credits in 2009 and 2010.  The credit is equal to 50% of an eligible taxpayer’s qualified investment in a qualifying therapeutic discovery project.

Somewhat lost in the excitement of pending healthcare legislation, on March 18, 2010, President Obama signed into law the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment (HIRE) Act.  The HIRE Act features two new tax benefits designed to incentivize employers to hire and retain workers who were previously unemployed or working part time.

Jump to Page
Close