The IRS has publicized a new draft version of Form 1118, "Foreign Tax Credit - Corporations," used by U.S. corporations to compute the foreign tax credit for taxes paid or accrued to foreign countries or U.S. possessions. "They adjusted the form to accommodate changes made by the 2004 American Jobs Creation Act," said Selva Ozelli, a New York-based CPA and international tax attorney. Under the act, the number of separate foreign income categories has been reduced from eight to two, and U.S. source income is re-characterized as foreign source income in cases where a taxpayer's foreign tax credit limitation has been reduced in an earlier year due to an overall domestic loss. "The most important change is that they've added a column to help taxpayers determine U.S. income that could be recharacterized due to recapture of overall domestic losses," said Ozelli. "This column will also help them in tracking their balances of overall domestic losses," she said.

Former Securities and Exchange Chairman Richard Breeden, whose hedge fund holds roughly 2 percent of the shares of H&R Block, is seeking a seat on the board of the tax-prep giant. Breeden, who now heads Breeden Capital Management LLC, will be on the company's proxy ballot along with two others during a September election. Block has an 11-member board. In the wake of posting a year-end loss of $434 million, investor pressure has mounted to force management to sell the company.

Internal Revenue Service chief counsel Donald L. Korb has named Stephen Kesselman to become deputy chief counsel, operations, succeeding IRS veteran Donald T. Rocen. Kesselman is currently serving as counsel in the IRS' Small Business/Self-Employed Division. Rocen, who has held a number of posts in the Office of the Chief Counsel for 15 years, will leave the service July 27 for the Washington law firm of Miller & Chevalier. Lon B. Smith, associate chief counsel of financial products and institutions, will now become national counsel to the chief counsel for special projects. He has served in the Office of Chief Counsel for 30 years.

Imagine that every time you began to drive your car, you received a 50-page printed report. It would give information on the characteristics of the gasoline, the place of origin, its evaporation point, the price paid for the gas this year versus the price paid last year, political influences on petroleum prices, and the percentage of the auto’s operating costs represented by fuel. That would be the start. But what the driver really wants to know is how much gasoline is in the tank and how far the car can get on that amount. And, if there were some nifty link between the gas tank and a GPS system, there should be a trigger that would bring up directions to the nearest gas stations once the fuel level dropped to a critical point. Reports from software systems are a lot like this—There’s all sorts of detail when all the user wants to know is how much gasoline is in the tank. The other problem is that the report is usually delivered after the car is out of gas. Users want to know when things are going wrong and how they can make things work better. Talking to practitioners about workflow software repeatedly brought up the point that they would like dashboards that enable them to know the status of returns, and who has them. Executives everywhere want reporting by exception, not stacks of reports, so that they can make corrections before things go wrong. It’s like the warning a car gives when the gas levels drop, usually to about one-eighth of a tank. Easier said than done, of course, because it takes more sophisticated systems to get finer control over an operation than it does to generate reams of small print. And that’s why the history of computing, until recently, has been about killing trees. The need for conserving the environment aside, simpler, more understandable reports in real time is what business needs—unless you just like reading reports. Or don’t like trees.

The Internal Revenue Service ruled that a partial termination of a qualified plan occurred where 23 percent of a plan's participants were no longer active due to the closing of one of the employer's four locations. Therefore, all plan participants were fully vested. Under Code Section 411(d)(3), a plan is required to provide that, upon its partial termination, the rights of all affected employees to benefits up to the date of the termination must be non-forfeitable. Under the regs, the IRS uses a facts and circumstances test to determine whether a partial termination has occurred. The IRS ruled that if the turnover rate is 20 percent or more, there is a presumption that a partial termination of the plan has occurred. The IRS determined the turnover rate by dividing the number of participating employees who had an employer-initiated severance from employment during the applicable period - in this case, the plan year - by the sum of all of the participating employees at the start of the applicable period and the employees who became participants during the applicable period. The 20 percent threshold merely creates a presumption, according to the IRS. Facts and circumstances indicating that the turnover rate for an applicable period is routine, and not the result of a shutdown as in this instance, favor a finding that there is no partial termination. The IRS also noted that a partial termination of a qualified plan can also occur for reasons other than turnover. For instance, a partial termination can occur due to plan amendments that adversely affect the rights of employees to vest in benefits under the plan, plan amendments that exclude a group of employees who have previously been covered by the plan, or the reduction or cessation of future benefit accruals resulting in a potential reversion to the employer.

Texas Governor Rick Perry has signed H.B. 2144, which eases restrictions on interstate CPA practices.

The Supreme Court has agreed to decide whether an exception in the Internal Revenue Code allows a trustee to deduct the full amount of fees paid to an investment advisor. The case of Knight v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, U.S., No. 06-1286, centers on trustee Michael J. Knight, who paid an investment advisor to manage the assets of a trust. When the trust filed its tax return, Knight sought to deduct the full amount of the fees under 26 U.S.C. Section 67(e)(1). However, the IRS said the fees are subject to the 2 percent rule. The U.S. Tax Court agreed with the IRS, as did the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which ruled against Knight in October. But Knight argued the fees fall under an exception to the general rule because they were paid in connection with the administration of the trust, and because they would not have been paid unless the assets were held in trust. In May, both the New York Bankers Association and the American Bankers Association May 22 filed a brief in support of the trustee, urging the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case.