Practice Management

The chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee has asked for information on the NCAA’s finances -- suggesting in the process that he might next be questioning the association to justify its tax-exempt status. "Most of the activities undertaken by educational organizations clearly further their (tax) exempt purpose," Rep. Bill Thomas, R-Calif., wrote in a letter to NCAA president Myles Brand. "The exempt purpose of intercollegiate athletics, however, is less apparent, particularly in the context of major college football and men's basketball programs." Specifically, Thomas asked for information on the NCAA’s television contract, the salaries of coaches, school sports facilities and total annual revenues and expenditures for Division I-A football programs and Division I basketball programs. He requested a response by the end of this month. Since 2004, the Ways and Means committee of Representatives has been conducting a broad review of the tax-exempt sector -- already looking into the tax-exempt status of nonprofit hospitals and credit unions among others. The NCAA's projected 2006-07 budget anticipates nearly $563 million in revenue, most from its TV contracts. More than half that figure is distributed to member leagues and schools, through student-athlete welfare, academic-enhancement and other programs. The remainder is paid according to the success of schools in the annual NCAA men's basketball tournament. Thomas notes in his letter that the annual returns filed by the NCAA with the IRS states that the primary purpose of the NCAA is to "maintain intercollegiate athletics as an integral part of the educational program and the athlete as an integral part of the student body,” and goes on to obliquely question college athletics' connection to higher education.

The leaders of the Senate Finance Committee have asked the Government Accountability Office to take a closer look at the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp., which insures the private pension plans for millions of workers.

Television viewers may know of The Amazing Kreskin, an entertainer who performs breathtaking mental feats that he says utilizes abilities we all have.

This week, the Tax Technical Corrections Act of 2006 was introduced in both houses of Congress. The legislation will essentially serve to cross the T’s and dot the I’s to several pieces of already-enacted legislation, clarifying definitions and refining certain timelines. Ways & Means Committee Chairman Bill Thomas, R-Calif., sponsored the bill in the House, while Finance Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, and ranking member Max Baucus, D-Mont., did the same in the Senate. Among others, the bill would make changes to:

In an effort to bolster its automotive practice unit, global firm Grant Thornton LLP has acquired Restructuring & Performance Improvement Group from financial advisory firm Stout Risius Ross Inc.

The Internal Revenue Service has launched its much-anticipated Income Verification Express Service or IVES, a program offering immediate electronic delivery of client tax and income information to financial lenders such as mortgage companies.

Just one week after the Treasury Department released a report on its strategy for closing the $300 billion tax gap, the ranking minority member of the Senate Finance Committee labeled the plan “incomplete” and not credible.Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., said he would continue to hold up the nomination of Eric Solomon as the assistant Treasury secretary for tax policy.

Several more 2007 Toyota models have been certified by the Internal Revenue Service to qualify for the hybrid tax credit enacted by the Energy Policy Act of 2005.

Tax software publisher CCH continued making an aggressive push into the small practitioner market, announcing its second major acquisition in as many months.The Wolters Kluwer business, which produces the ProSystem fx Office line of accounting and business software products, signaled its determination to take on the marketplace leader, Intuit Inc.'s QuickBooks, by striking a pact to purchase TaxWise Corp.

During the past 15 years, I have had the opportunity to read and analyze nearly 150 partnership agreements, and it always amazes me how outdated and inadequate so many of them are.There are basically two major reasons for this. First, many firms just fail to give adequate attention to their partnership agreements. Second, over the years, the firm may have modified its original agreement or made separate agreements as new partners entered, and these agreements are significantly different from one another. None of the agreements have been consolidated into one current agreement.