Senate tax writers on Capitol Hill continue to discuss bipartisan retirement savings bills as the House gears up for a vote on a related tax measure.

Senate tax writers on Capitol Hill continue to discuss bipartisan retirement savings bills as the House gears up for a vote on a related tax measure.

The Senate Finance Committee (SFC) held a May 14 hearing during which lawmakers on both sides of the aisle highlighted the importance of moving forward with retirement savings-related legislative efforts. While a number of related tax proposals have been introduced recently, SFC lawmakers paid particular focus to the bipartisan Retirement Enhancement Savings Bill, more commonly referred to as “RESA.”

“[T]his committee worked on a bipartisan basis to put together the [RESA],” SFC ranking member Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said during opening statements. “Our bill is all about making it easier for employers -- particularly small businesses -- to offer retirement plans to their employees,” Wyden added. “Giving those small businesses an opportunity to band together and offer a common retirement plan is a simpler and more cost-effective way of helping more people save.”

House Vote Expected on Secure Bill

Notably, the Senate’s RESA bill has many similarities to the House’s Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement (SECURE) Bill of 2019 (HR 1994). The bipartisan SECURE Bill is expected to reach the House floor for a full chamber vote in the coming days.

“We’re on track to go to the House floor this month,” Kara Getz, chief tax counsel for House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Neal, DMass., has said. Getz, while speaking on May 10 at the American Bar Association (ABA) May Tax Meeting in Washington, D.C., said that the House bill is derived from a true “partnership” between Democrats and Republicans.

To that end, SFC Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, alluded during the May 14 hearing that the Senate and House measures could soon be reconciled and enacted. “I’m hoping that the House will send its version of RESA over to us at some point this month,” Grassley said. “And, I’ll continue to work closely with Senator Wyden and other Committee members to reconcile the differences and get this important bill to the President.”

Additionally, Drew Crouch, senior tax counsel for the SFC minority, while speaking on May 10 at the ABA May Meeting, stated that there is a “high probability” the retirement bill(s) will be enacted this year. Crouch further emphasized this position by adding that that there is a “high chance retirement legislation will make it across the finish line,” in this Congress.

Retirement Savings 2.0

Meanwhile, House and Senate lawmakers are already working toward Retirement Savings “2.0,” Getz stated at the ABA May Meeting. House tax writers are “actively working on 2.0,” Getz said, adding that, “we would really like to markup a second retirement bill.”

Likewise, Grassley alluded to the Retirement Savings 2.0 initiative on May 14, noting in his
opening statement that the SFC hearing “marks the start of our work on the next round of retirement savings reforms.”

To that end, SFC members Rob Portman, R Ohio, and Ben Cardin, D-Md., on March 14 introduced
a 132-page bipartisan retirement savings tax bill. The Retirement Savings & Security Bill would
make several sweeping reforms to retirement savings.

President Donald Trump and Democratic congressional leaders have agreed to develop a $2 trillion infrastructure plan, according to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.

President Donald Trump and Democratic congressional leaders have agreed to develop a $2 trillion infrastructure plan, according to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.

$2 Trillion Infrastructure Plan

"There was goodwill in this meeting…which is a very good thing," Schumer told reporters at the White House on April 30 after meeting with Trump. "We agreed on a number – $2 trillion for infrastructure,"Schumer said. Further, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Schumer both praised Trump after the meeting for his bipartisan cooperation.

The president and Democratic leaders were to meet again to discuss how to pay for the infrastructure plan, Schumer said. At that time, Trump is expected to convey his ideas on funding, Schumer added. "This was a very, very good start…and we hope it will go to a constructive conclusion."

“Pay-Fors”

Additionally, Schumer told reporters at the White House that the infrastructure plan’s "pay-fors"remained undetermined. Notably, Schumer suggested from the Senate floor on April 29 rolling back part of Republicans’ 2017 tax reform law to fund infrastructure costs.

Generally, infrastructure is considered a bipartisan priority among lawmakers. However, reaching an agreement on how to pay for the reportedly $2 trillion infrastructure plan that is still in development is expected on Capitol Hill to be an arduous task. Namely, Democrats are expected to propose scaling back certain tax cuts under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) ( P.L. 115-97) to foot the infrastructure bill, which is not likely to receive GOP support.

"That’s a non-starter" Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., told reporters at the U.S. Capitol on April 30. "This tax bill [TCJA] is what has generated this robust economy; the last thing we want to do is step on all of this growth…by repealing in effect what has generated all of this prosperity and low unemployment," McConnell said.

White House: Meeting Excellent, Productive

Meanwhile, the White House praised the April 30 infrastructure meeting between Trump and top congressional Democrats, calling it "excellent and productive," as noted in a statement released by White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders shortly after the meeting. Notably, however, the statement did not mention the $2 trillion figure allegedly agreed upon by Trump and Democratic congressional leadership.

"We will have another meeting in three weeks to discuss specific proposals and financing methods,"Sanders added. "The president looks forward to working together in a bipartisan way and getting things done for the American people."

Highly anticipated proposed regulations have been issued on the withholding required with respect to the disposition of certain partnership interests. The proposed regulations affect certain foreign persons that recognize gain or loss on the disposition of an interest in a partnership that is engaged in a trade or business in the United States, and persons that acquire those interests. Also affected are partnerships that directly or indirectly have foreign partners.

Highly anticipated proposed regulations have been issued on the withholding required with respect to the disposition of certain partnership interests. The proposed regulations affect certain foreign persons that recognize gain or loss on the disposition of an interest in a partnership that is engaged in a trade or business in the United States, and persons that acquire those interests. Also affected are partnerships that directly or indirectly have foreign partners.

Gain or loss from the disposition of a partnership interest is treated as income effectively connected to a U.S. trade or business, to the extent that there would have been effectively connected income to the foreign partner, if the partnership assets were sold under Code sec. 864(c)(8). The withholding rules of Code Sec. 1446(f) require 10 percent withholding on the amount realized on the disposition, absent certification that the transferor is not a nonresident alien or foreign corporation.

The proposed regulations are a companion to Proposed Reg. 1.864(c)(8)-1 issued in December 2018, on gain or loss by foreign persons on the disposition of a partnership interest.

Reporting, Withholding and Paying Tax

The proposed regulations provide rules for withholding, reporting and paying tax upon the disposition of a partnership interest in a partnership described in Code Sec. 864(c)(8) and Proposed Reg. 1.864(c)(8)-1. The proposed regulations adopt much of the temporary guidance issued in Notice 2018-29, I.R.B. 2018-16, 495, which looked to the rules for withholding on dispositions of U.S. real property interests by foreign persons in Code Sec. 1445.

The proposed regulations also:

• clarify the reporting rules for transfers of partnership interests under Code Sec. 6050(k),
• provide rules for implementing withholding by brokers on transfers of certain interests in publicly traded partnerships,
• make changes to withholding rules for distributions by publicly traded partnerships,
• make changes to reporting rules and procedures for adjusting withholding; and
• provide coordination rules to prevent overwithholding.

A transferee is required to report and pay any tax withheld by the 20th day after the date of the transfer. Form 8288, U.S. Withholding Tax Return for Dispositions by Foreign Persons of U.S. Real Property Interests, and Form 8288-A, Statement of Withholding on Dispositions by Foreign Persons of U.S. Real Property Interests.

The proposed regulations also provide rules that address a partnership’s requirement to withhold if the transferee fails to withhold.

General Rule and Exceptions

A transferee of a partnership interest must withhold a tax equal to 10 percent of the amount realized on any transfer of a partnership interest (other than certain publicly traded partnership interests), if the gain is treated as effectively connected income.

There are six exceptions to withholding under the proposed regulations:

• certification by transferor of non-foreign status,
• certification by transferor that no gain is realized on transfer by transferor,
• certification by partnership that effectively connected gain from the disposition would be less than 10 percent,
• certification by transferor that for prior three tax years its effectively connected taxable income for each year was less than 10 percent of its total distributive share of net partnership income for the year;
• certification by transferor that a nonrecognition provision applies, and
• certification by transferor that a treaty provision applies.

Publicly Traded Partnership Interests

The proposed regulations provide rules for withholding and reporting on the transfer of an interest in a publicly traded partnership (a PTP interest). The withholding obligation is generally limited to brokers that receive proceeds from the sale and act on behalf of the transferor. Once the proposed regulations are final, the suspension on withholding on a PTP interest in Notice 2018-08, I.R.B. 2018-7, 352, will end.

Notice Requirements

A foreign partner that transfers its partnership interest will need information from the partnership to compute its tax liability based on the deemed sale. Rules are provided that will facilitate the transfer of information between a foreign partner and partnership for purposes of Code Sec. 864(c)(8).

Proposed regulations provide rules on the attribution of ownership of stock or other interests for determining whether a person is a related person with respect to a controlled foreign corporation (CFC) under the foreign base company sales income rules.

Proposed regulations provide rules on the attribution of ownership of stock or other interests for determining whether a person is a related person with respect to a controlled foreign corporation (CFC) under the foreign base company sales income rules.

The proposed regulations also provide rules to determine whether a CFC receives rents in the active conduct of a trade or business, for determining the exception from foreign personal holding company income.

Ownership Attribution

The proposed regulations provide specific rules for applying principles similar to those in the Code Sec. 958(b) constructive ownership rules when determining related person status under the foreign base company sales rules. Determining related person status is relevant for many purposes, including whether certain types of income can be characterized as subpart F foreign base company sales or service income.

A person is a related person with respect to a CFC if the person is:

• an individual who controls the CFC;
• an entity that controls or is controlled by the CFC; or
• an entity that is controlled by the same person that controls the CFC.

Under current Reg. §1.954-1(f), the Code Sec. 318(a)(3) downward attribution rules, which attribute ownership downward from the owner of an entity to an entity, apply by reference to the Code Sec. 958stock ownership rules. These rules are applied regardless of the size of the ownership interest in a partnership, estate or trust, but are applied to corporations based on a 50-percent or more ownership interest.

Based on concern that the downward attribution rules could produce inappropriate results, the proposed regulations provide that the downward attribution rule of Code Sec. 318(a)(3) and Reg. §1.958-2(d) will not apply for purposes of determining related person status under the foreign base company sales income rules.

This change does not preclude a corporation, partnership, trust, or estate from being treated as controlled by the same person or persons that control the CFC under other rules that remain applicable for the related person rules.

Additionally, an anti-abuse rule is provided with respect to the option attribution rule in Code Sec. 318(a)(4). The option attribution rule will not be applied to treat a person with an option as owning the stock or equity interest for purposes of the related person rule if the principal purpose of using the option was to cause a person to be treated as a related person.

The proposed regulations also incorporate a similar rule issued in Notice 2007-9, 2007-1 CB 401. The rule applies if the principal purpose for the use of an option is to qualify dividends, interest, rents or royalties paid by a foreign corporation for the Code Sec. 954(c)(6) CFC look-through exception from foreign personal holding company income. The rule is proposed to apply for tax years of CFCs beginning after December 31, 2006, and ending before the date that final regulation are published in the Federal Register, and for tax year of U.S. shareholders in which or with which such tax years end.

Foreign Personal Holding Company Rules

The proposed regulations modify the foreign personal holding company rules on amounts paid or incurred by a CFC in connection with the CFC’s rental income and the active rents exception. Rents are excluded from foreign personal holding company income if they are:

• received from a person other than a related person; and
• from the active conduct of a trade or business.

If rents are from leasing property as a result of marketing activities, there must be a substantial marketing organization in order to meet the active trade or business test. Under a safe harbor, an organization is substantial if active leasing expenses equal or exceed 25 percent of adjusted leasing profit. If the CFC receives rents from property it does not own, the substantiality of the organization is determined net of those rent payments.

The propose regulations extend the rule to apply to royalties, in addition to rents. As a result, the substantiality of the organization is determined under the safe harbor, net of the rents or royalties paid or incurred by the lessor CFC, for the right to use the property (or a component part of the property) that generated the rental income.

Applicability Date

The proposed regulations are generally proposed to apply to tax years of CFCs ending on or after the date the final regulations are published in the Federal Register, and for tax year of U.S. shareholders in which or with which such tax years end.

Final regulations have been issued on transactions of U.S. taxpayers that have qualified business units (QBUs) with functional currency other than the U.S. dollar.

Final regulations have been issued on transactions of U.S. taxpayers that have qualified business units (QBUs) with functional currency other than the U.S. dollar. Specifically, the final regulations:

• cover combinations and separations of QBUs subject to Code Sec. 987 (Reg. 1.987-2 and Reg. 1. 987-4),
• cover recognition and deferral of foreign currency gain or loss with respect to a QBU subject to Code Sec. 987 in connection with certain QBU terminations and other transactions involving partnerships (Reg. 1. 987-12), and 
• withdraw Temporary regulations that determine a partner’s share of assets and liabilities of a Code Sec. 987 aggregate partnership (Temporary Reg. 1.987-7T). In general, the regulations prevent the selective recognition of Code Sec. 987 gain or loss.

Applicability Dates

The IRS declined to extend the applicability of these provisions. The final regulations retain the applicability dates of the temporary regulations, as extended by IRS guidance. The final regulations under Reg. 1.987-2 and Reg. 1. 987-4 generally apply to tax years beginning on or after the day that is three years after the first day of the first tax year following December 7, 2016. The final regulations under Reg. 1. 987-12 generally apply to any deferral event or outbound loss event that occurs on or after January 6, 2017.

Medicaid waiver payments were earned income, even though IRS Notice 2014-7 treated them as “difficulty of care” foster care payments that were excluded from gross income. The Tax Court held that excluding the payments from earned income would improperly deny the taxpayers’ earned income credit and the additional child tax credit.

Medicaid waiver payments were earned income, even though IRS Notice 2014-7 treated them as “difficulty of care” foster care payments that were excluded from gross income. The Tax Court held that excluding the payments from earned income would improperly deny the taxpayers’ earned income credit and the additional child tax credit.

IRS Excludes Medicaid Waiver Payments From Gross Income

The taxpayers received payments under a state Medicaid waiver program for proving care to their adult disabled children in the family home. IRC §131 excludes foster care payments from gross income, but it applies only when the foster individuals are placed in the caregiver’s home by the state. Despite the statutory language, however, Notice 2014-7 treats Medicaid waiver payments as excludable “difficulty of care” foster payments. Thus, the taxpayers excluded the payments from their gross income.

Gross Income Vs. Earned Income

However, the taxpayers included the payments in their earned income, which allowed them to claim the earned income credit and the additional child tax credit. The IRS denied the credits, arguing that only gross income can be earned income. The Tax Court sided with the taxpayers.

No Deference For Notice 2014-7

The court concluded that Notice 2014-7 was entitled to little if any deference for two reasons:

1. The taxpayers’ payments did not satisfy the plain statutory definition of excludable foster care payments.
2. The notice reversed the IRS’s long-held position that payments like these were not foster care payments

Although the Medicaid waiver payments were not covered by §131, they absolutely fell within the statutory definition of “earned income.” The IRS could not rely on Notice 2014-7 to deny credits that Congress clearly intended to provide for earned income.

IRS, Not Congress, Provided Double Benefit

Finally, the court recognized that the taxpayers were receiving an unintended double benefit, because they were getting tax credits that were based on tax-free income. However, this was only because the IRS:

1. unilaterally decided to exclude Medicaid waiver
   payments from gross income, and
2. failed to argue that if the Tax Court included the payments in earned income, they should also be included in gross income.

One planning thought if your do not get the full impact of your Charitable donations is to setup a Donor-Advised Fund. A donor-advised fund is like a charitable investment account, for the sole purpose of supporting charitable organizations you care about. 

On December 22, the President signed into law the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA). Personal Exemptions have been eliminated and replaced with higher standard deductions for individuals and married couples. State and Local Taxes (SALT) for state income tax, property taxes have been limited to $10,000 for 2018.  The Standard Deduction will increase from $6,350 per person in 2017 to $12,000 per person in 2018. All persons over age 65 will also be permitted an additional $1,300 increase in their Standard Deduction.    

In 2018, married couple without a mortgage and regular medical expenses, that makes less than $14,000 in charitable contributions will not get any tax benefit for their donations, ($24,000 standard deduction, less $10,000 for state and local income taxes equal $14,000 maximum charitable contributions without tax benefit).

One planning thought if your do not get the full impact of your Charitable donations is to setup a Donor-Advised Fund. A donor-advised fund is like a charitable investment account, for the sole purpose of supporting charitable organizations you care about. When you contribute cash, securities or other assets to a donor-advised fund, you are generally eligible to take an immediate tax deduction. Then those funds can be invested for tax-free growth and you can recommend grants to virtually any IRS-qualified public charity.

Various brokerage firms sponsor donor-advised funds, such as Fidelity Investments, Charles Schwab and Merrill Lynch.  Each firm have different requirements for minimum contributions, fees and minimum grants amounts to charities. 

Let’s say you typically donate $5,000 per year.  You could fund the next four years by donating $20,000 of appreciated stock to the fund.  You are best to donate the stock with the largest gain.  You pay no tax on the gain but get full deduction of the $20,000 fair market value in the year of donation.  The fund will sell your stock but provide you an opportunity to invest that amount within the fund to grow tax deferred.  You can than direct the fund to send money to charities of your choice with no minimum grant requirement.  You can designate an heir to continue to send donations from your fund should you not complete all your donations.  Once contributed to the fund, you can never get the funds returned.

Donation of appreciated securities usually makes the most sense.  Let’s say you donate $20,000 stock with a cost of $10,000.  If you sold those stock to make the donation you could owe $3,380 (Federal Capital Gain rate of 23.8% and California of 10%) in taxes leaving a net of $16,620 to charities.  If you donated appreciated securities, you could grant the full $20,000 to charities.  Keep in mind that in both cases, you would get a tax deduction up to 47% of the donation, (Federal maximum tax rate of 37% and California of 10%).

One further advantage of a donor-advised fund is that the record keeping requirement for individual donations is eliminated, since the fund will keep track of the donations.

If this is too complicated, many charities will also accept the direct donation of securities providing the same tax benefits.

Congress passed the most significant tax reform bill in thirty years, “The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act”. One of the more complex areas is the new deduction for “qualified business income” – often referred to as QBI.  You may hear this talked about as the “New 20% Pass-Through Tax Deduction” or the “Section 199A Deduction”. 

In December 2017, Congress passed the most significant tax reform bill in thirty years, “The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act”. One of the more complex areas is the new deduction for “qualified business income” – often referred to as QBI.  You may hear this talked about as the “New 20% Pass-Through Tax Deduction” or the “Section 199A Deduction”.  Regular “C” corporations do not qualify for this deduction; however, starting in 2018 they do qualify for a low 21% corporate tax rate.

The pass-through deduction is a deduction you may take on your Form 1040 even if you do not itemize. There will be a line to list it on the second page of our Form 1040. It is not an “above the line” deduction on the first page of Form 1040 that reduces your adjusted gross income (AGI). Moreover, the deduction only reduces income taxes, not Social Security or Medicare taxes

This new provision should provide a substantial tax benefit to individuals with qualified business income from a partnership, S corporation, LLC, or sole proprietorship. For tax purposes, what distinguishes these types of businesses is that the business pays no income taxes themselves. Instead, the profits (or losses) from such businesses are passed through the business to the owners whom pay tax on the money on their individual tax returns at their individual tax rates.

QBI is the net income (profit) your pass-through business earns during the year. You determine this by subtracting all your regular business deductions from your total business income. QBI includes rental income so long as your rental activity qualifies as a business. It also includes income from publicly traded partnerships, real estate investment trusts (REITs), and qualified cooperatives. QBI does not include:

• short-term or long-term capital gain or loss—for example, a landlord would not include capital gain earned from selling a rental property
• dividend income
• interest income
• wages paid to S corporation shareholders
• guaranteed payments to partners in partnerships or LLC members, or
• business income earned outside the United States.

QBI is determined separately for each separate business you own. If one or more of your businesses lose money, you deduct (net) the loss from the QBI from your profitable businesses. If you have a qualified business loss—that is, your net QBI is zero or less--you get no pass-through deduction for the year. Any loss is carried forward to the next year and is deducted against your QBI for that year. This serves as a penalty for having a money-losing business.

To determine your pass-through deduction, you must first figure your total taxable income for the year (not counting the pass-through deduction). This is your total taxable income from all sources (business, investment, and job income) minus deductions, including the standard deduction ($12,000 for singles and $24,000 for marrieds filing jointly in 2018). You must have positive taxable income to take the pass-through deduction.

Moreover, the deduction can never exceed 20% of your taxable income.

Rules are in place to deter high-income taxpayers from attempting to convert wages or other compensation for personal services into income eligible for the deduction. These rules involve “thresholds.” This means that you might be ineligible for the deduction if you have a business that is classified as a specified service trade or business, SSTB. What is a specified service trade or business?  These are trades or businesses involving the performance of services in the fields of health, law, consulting, athletics, financial or brokerage services. There is a final catchall category that includes any business where the principal asset is the reputation or skill of one or more of its owners or employees. This likely includes many individuals who provide services not listed above. However, all the details have yet to be worked out by the IRS. Architecture and engineering services are expressly not included in the list of personal services. So, spas and health clubs are in, medical services provided by high income physicians, nurses, dentists etc. are out.  High income attorneys, accountants, actuaries, financial advisors, mortgage brokers, realtors, actors, musicians etc. are out, but promoters, broadcasters, engineers and architects are in.

Starting in 2018, taxpayers with qualified business income (including rental income), may be eligible to take a tax deduction up to 20% of their QBI.  Determining whether you will be eligible to capture the full 20% deduction will be based on your total taxable income for year.    The taxable income thresholds are as follows:

Single filers:                   $157,500 (SSBT with phase-outs at $207,500)

Married filing joint:         $315,000 (SSBT with phase-outs at $415,000)

If your business is one of the Specified Service Trade or Services above these thresholds, you may not qualify for the deduction. The SSBT phased-out is 2% for every $1,000 your income exceeds the $157,500, or 1% for every $1,000 your income exceeds the $315,000 threshold.

If you exceed the income thresholds, your deduction is the lesser of: 

1. 20% of QBI
2. The greater of:

50% of W-2 wages paid to employees

25% of W-2 wages paid to employees PLUS 2.5% of the unadjusted asset basis

The business property must be depreciable long-term property used in the production of income—for example, the real property or equipment used in the business (not inventory). The cost is its unadjusted basis—the original acquisition cost, minus cost of land, if any. The 2.5% deduction can be taken during the entire deprecation period for the property. For use in this property calculation, the period of use starts on the date the property is places in service and ends on the LATER 10 years or the last day of the asset regular depreciation period.

If you have neither employees nor depreciable property, you get no deduction if your income is over the thresholds. This is intended to encourage pass-through owners to hire employees and/or buy property for their business.

Fancy footwork may seem the way to go when dealing with the new tax rules, but the old reliable methods of reducing income have a better chance having stood the test of time. Lowering your income if you are already below the phaseout has less benefit than in the past as business deductions are technically only worth 80 cents on the dollar. (You get a 20% deduction anyway if you don’t invest in the expense.) The phase out is where things really get interesting. If you’re reasonably close to the phase out threshold, a modest amount of planning could make the difference between the full QBI deduction and no deduction at all.

Some Simple Examples:

Mark is married and files jointly. He earned $345,000 in taxable income this year. His sole proprietorship consulting business earned $345,000 and paid $100,000 to employees. Consulting is one of service provider categories SSTB, so his pass-through deduction is subject to the phase-out. His $345,000 taxable income is $30,000, or 30% ($30,000/$1,000,000), over the $315,000 threshold. Before the phase-out, his deduction is limited to 50% of the W2 wages he paid, which was $50,000 (50% x $100,000 W2 wages = $50,000). Since, his phase-out percentage is 30%, he gets 70% of the full deduction, or $35,000 (70% x $50,000 = $35,000). If his taxable income was over $415,000, there would be no QBI deduction.

Jim and Sue are married and file jointly. Their taxable income this year is $500,000, including $400,000 in QBI they earned from their bar business they own through an LLC. They employed four bartenders during the year to whom they paid $150,000 in W2 wages. They own their bar building. They bought it four years ago for $600,000 and the land is worth $100,000, so its unadjusted acquisition basis is $500,000. Their maximum possible pass-through deduction is 20% of their $400,000 QBI, which equals $80,000. However, since their taxable income was over $415,000, their pass-through deduction is limited to the greater of (1) 50% of the W2 wages they paid their employees, or (2) 25% of W2 wages plus 2.5% of their bar building’s $500,000 basis. (1) is $75,000 (50% x $150,000 = $75,000; (2) is $50,000 (2.5% x $500,000) + (25% x $150,000) = $50,000. (1) is greater so their pass-through deduction is $75,000.

Alice, a single taxpayer, owns a 5-unit apartment building. She earned $250,000 in QBI income and total taxable income during 2018, well over the $207,500 threshold for singles. She has no employees in her rental business. Thus, her pass-through deduction is limited to 2.5% of the unadjusted basis of the long-term property she uses in her rental business. This consists of her building, which she purchased five years ago. Her unadjusted basis in the building (purchase price minus value of the land) is $500,000. Her pass-through deduction is 2.5% x $500,000 = $12,500.