00;00;00;00 - 00;00;02;05
Speaker 1
Okay, standby.
00;00;07;15 - 00;00;33;27
Speaker 1
Welcome back to elements of Private Tax. This is Damien Martin, joined by my esteemed co-host Tony Nitti, to break down the intricate world of private tax into practical insights you can use today, one element at a time. In today’s episode, our second, we pick up where we left off in our first episode to dig into some of the intricacies and far-reaching impacts of the final reconciliation bill, formally and informally known as the One Big Beautiful Bill.
00;00;33;29 - 00;01;07;05
Speaker 1
This legislation, which was signed into law on July 4th, 2025, promises to, among other things, impact families and high-net worth individuals in some significant ways. Our conversation today examines how the elemental changes in the bill will affect family-owned businesses, estate planning, tax compliance and more. We’re excited to share the mic today with guest Dianne Mehany. Dianne is the EY US Private Tax National Tax Leader, bringing over two decades of unparalleled experience with a distinguished career centered on controversy and planning for high-net worth individuals and their affiliated entities.
00;01;07;11 - 00;01;16;14
Speaker 1
I think you’ll agree when I say Dianne’s insights are invaluable and so, without further ado, let’s get to our conversation with Dianne on the final reconciliation bill.
00;01;18;01 - 00;01;18;17
Unknown
Dianne, would you please do the honors?
00;01;18;17 - 00;01;21;20
Speaker 1
I guess just to kick us off here, we’ll jump straight in.
00;01;21;20 - 00;01;27;01
Speaker 1
In our first episode of the podcast, Tony, we were talking a little bit with
00;01;27;01 - 00;01;30;09
Speaker 1
our former colleague David Kirk, about
00;01;30;09 - 00;01;40;19
Speaker 1
what might happen, that the uncertainty we’re seeing, the outlook for legislative change. Maybe before we get to where we are, maybe we get to how we got here and
00;01;40;19 - 00;01;42;27
Speaker 1
what’s happened since that first episode?
00;01;43;00 - 00;01;43;23
Speaker 2
Yeah.
00;01;43;23 - 00;01;44;26
Speaker 2
Happy to do that.
00;01;44;26 - 00;01;50;18
Speaker 2
The best way to put it is when we finished that initial podcast,
00;01;50;18 - 00;01;54;19
Speaker 2
at that point, all you could say is that the stage was set.
00;01;54;19 - 00;01;55;06
Speaker 2
And what
00;01;55;06 - 00;02;07;15
Speaker 2
I mean by that is like, we knew what the Republicans were going to hope to do. We just had no idea how it was going to unfold, and we knew what they were going to hope to do, because since November of 2024,
00;02;07;18 - 00;02;13;15
Speaker 2
when the elections were finalized, we knew that Republicans controlled the White House, the House and the Senate.
00;02;13;18 - 00;02;15;28
Speaker 2
And because they did,
00;02;15;28 - 00;02;21;21
Speaker 2
they could pass tax legislation without a single vote from the Democrats.
00;02;21;21 - 00;02;25;05
Speaker 2
And that all comes back to two very important words that
00;02;25;05 - 00;02;29;01
Speaker 2
a lot of people have gotten familiar with over the last six months,
00;02;29;01 - 00;02;36;13
Speaker 2
budget reconciliation, because with this streamlined budget reconciliation process, you can,
00;02;36;13 - 00;02;41;10
Speaker 2
pass a bill in the Senate without needing the traditional 60 votes.
00;02;41;12 - 00;02;53;05
Speaker 2
Instead, when it gets to the Senate, the bill can pass with a simple majority. So with the Republicans controlling the White House, the House and also the Senate, assuming they were to stay unified enough,
00;02;53;05 - 00;03;00;15
Speaker 2
they could simply pass their bill in the House and the Senate without any need for any input or votes
00;03;00;15 - 00;03;01;27
Speaker 2
from the Democrats.
00;03;01;29 - 00;03;09;05
Speaker 2
And so we knew Republicans were going to look to unlock that budget reconciliation process and we knew it was going to at least,
00;03;09;05 - 00;03;36;22
Speaker 2
attempt to be done quickly because their priority was going to be to extend tax provisions that were going to be expiring at the end of 2025. So the clock was ticking. And ironically enough, those provisions were expiring because they were enacted in 2017 when the Republicans passed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the last time they had control of the White House, House and Senate.
00;03;36;25 - 00;03;38;19
Speaker 2
But in order to comply with certain
00;03;38;19 - 00;03;55;23
Speaker 2
budgetary restrictions in using this reconciliation process, they had to make all of these individual provisions temporary. And so the clock has been taking on those since 2017. And if Congress did not act by the end of 2025, then
00;03;55;23 - 00;03;57;03
Speaker 2
at midnight on New Year’s Eve,
00;03;57;03 - 00;04;03;04
Speaker 2
all those TCJA provisions would have expired and the law would have sunset back to 2017.
00;04;03;06 - 00;04;16;28
Speaker 2
So we knew at a minimum, the Republicans were going to use the advantages they had in the House and the Senate to extend those expiring provisions, and then also to layer on top,
00;04;16;28 - 00;04;26;11
Speaker 2
some of President Trump’s campaign trail promises, right, whether it’s tax-free tips or overtime and then, of course, we knew they were going to have to pay for some of those tax cuts.
00;04;26;11 - 00;04;45;29
Speaker 2
And so we anticipated perhaps some big changes coming on the international side, for example. And so that’s where we left off after the last podcast, we’re just like, the table was set, we knew what they wanted to do. Just how is it going to unfold? And the best parallel I can find, Damien in
00;04;45;29 - 00;04;50;01
Speaker 2
popular culture to how things have gone since our last podcast is it’s
00;04;50;01 - 00;04;54;17
Speaker 2
like the rumble scene in Anchorman where like at first,
00;04;54;17 - 00;04;57;17
Speaker 2
it’s just there’s a lot of posturing and bravado.
00;04;57;17 - 00;05;04;11
Speaker 2
But man, once the action got going, as Ron Burgundy said, things escalated very quickly.
00;05;04;11 - 00;05;05;20
Speaker 2
And this process just
00;05;05;20 - 00;05;15;25
Speaker 2
took flight and nothing was going to stop it because soon after we finished our podcast in February, we started to get through the more
00;05;15;25 - 00;05;17;04
Speaker 2
slow,
00;05;17;04 - 00;05;26;04
Speaker 2
painful process where things were dragging on a little bit in terms of having both the House and Senate to have to pass a budget resolution.
00;05;26;12 - 00;05;27;24
Speaker 2
It’s this first step that doesn’t
00;05;27;24 - 00;05;37;18
Speaker 2
have tax provisions, but you’ve got to pass these budget resolutions with reconciliation instructions within them and it’s just part of the process. And that’s what
00;05;37;18 - 00;05;43;02
Speaker 2
dragged on and took some time. The House got theirs done in late February, but it took until April,
00;05;43;02 - 00;05;45;18
Speaker 2
for the Senate to pass their
00;05;45;18 - 00;05;46;24
Speaker 2
resolution.
00;05;46;26 - 00;05;53;27
Speaker 2
And so those first like two, three months, not a whole heck of a lot happened. But once we got to the actual
00;05;53;27 - 00;06;09;03
Speaker 2
legislation drafting stage, that’s where, like I said, it just took off. And there was this informal deadline of July 4th, right, that President Trump hoped to get this done by. But so many times from May to even last week,
00;06;09;03 - 00;06;14;00
Speaker 2
you heard high-ranking people in Congress say, hey, July 4th is probably not realistic.
00;06;14;00 - 00;06;15;07
Speaker 2
It’s probably not realistic,
00;06;15;07 - 00;06;18;01
Speaker 2
It’s going to have to push. Didn’t end up having to push.
00;06;18;04 - 00;06;19;23
Speaker 2
The way things unfolded, it’s
00;06;19;23 - 00;06;28;18
Speaker 2
fairly remarkable where early May, the House got going on their proposed legislation and by May 22nd,
00;06;28;18 - 00;06;33;20
Speaker 2
after obviously having to do some horse trading and get people on board and make some changes,
00;06;33;20 - 00;06;35;15
Speaker 2
they were able to pass their
00;06;35;15 - 00;06;38;05
Speaker 2
version of the One Big Beautiful bill in the House, but
00;06;38;05 - 00;06;40;29
Speaker 2
the original one was at 215 to 214 margin.
00;06;40;29 - 00;06;54;13
Speaker 2
So the slimmest of margins. And then with Memorial Day weekend and some recess built in; it sat for a couple weeks. But then the Senate takes over and drafts up their version of the legislation
00;06;54;13 - 00;07;02;28
Speaker 2
starting like June 13th, basically. And you’re thinking it’s June 13th. The Senate is just getting started. There’s no way this can all
00;07;03;05 - 00;07;05;03
Speaker 2
be finalized by 4th of July.
00;07;05;03 - 00;07;06;15
Speaker 2
And it just
00;07;06;15 - 00;07;08;05
Speaker 2
got momentum and never
00;07;08;05 - 00;07;08;29
Speaker 2
stopped.
00;07;08;29 - 00;07;10;25
Speaker 2
By June 20th,
00;07;10;25 - 00;07;26;26
Speaker 2
they were marking up the Senate bill, making amendments. By June 30th, they were voting on it. By the early morning of July 1st, it had passed the Senate. But even then, right, like great, one bill has passed the House, a different version in the Senate has passed the Senate.
00;07;26;26 - 00;07;35;03
Speaker 2
This could have dragged on for weeks or even months, because the House is not obligated to simply just take the Senate bill and say, we’re good with that.
00;07;35;03 - 00;07;36;13
Speaker 2
They could say, no, no,
00;07;36;13 - 00;07;41;14
Speaker 2
we’re not on board with a number of these changes that you made to our bill. So now we’re going to go to conference committee.
00;07;41;14 - 00;07;42;21
Speaker 2
We’re going to hammer out
00;07;42;21 - 00;07;47;11
Speaker 2
a bill that we can all agree upon and then it’s got to go through more votes. But instead,
00;07;47;11 - 00;07;59;00
Speaker 2
what will end up being one of the more noteworthy aspects of this whole process is, to the surprise of many, the House just looked at that Senate bill that came to them on July 1st and said, yeah, we can live with this.
00;07;59;01 - 00;08;00;21
Speaker 2
And July 3rd,
00;08;00;21 - 00;08;15;18
Speaker 2
the House held their vote on that version of the Senate bill and this one passed by a 218 to 214 margin. And a miracle of miracles, the House and Senate had passed the legislation by July 3rd, enabling President Trump to sign it into law
00;08;15;18 - 00;08;18;06
Speaker 2
on the day he had hoped to do it, which was the 4th of July.
00;08;18;06 - 00;08;19;07
Speaker 2
And so,
00;08;19;07 - 00;08;20;23
Speaker 2
like I said, just
00;08;20;23 - 00;08;27;28
Speaker 2
crazy to think when you look back how many times people in a position to know said, hey, we’re going to have to be patient here,
00;08;27;28 - 00;08;33;05
Speaker 2
the 4th of July is a nice to have day, but it’s very, very unlikely. And then here we are,
00;08;33;05 - 00;08;37;06
Speaker 2
July 4th and we’ve got new legislation to unpack.
00;08;37;08 - 00;08;43;05
Speaker 1
That’s right. And again, maybe to make a bit of a movie reference, I guess, in a way to say that
00;08;43;05 - 00;08;55;01
Speaker 1
if we look at the last time we saw this movie with the TCJA, right, it was the end of December and now we’re here at the beginning of July. Like you said, we’ve got enacted legislation. Now we’re trying to digest it.
00;08;55;03 - 00;08;56;03
Speaker 1
It went through the process
00;08;56;03 - 00;08;56;11
Speaker 1
And,
00;08;56;11 - 00;09;04;28
Speaker 1
this is always part of that process and perhaps maybe surprisingly so, the number of turns that we saw were lower, but
00;09;04;28 - 00;09;07;11
Speaker 1
there are some changes as it went through.
00;09;07;11 - 00;09;10;19
Speaker 1
That’s always the challenging part, I guess, in my experience of
00;09;10;19 - 00;09;12;15
Speaker 1
just trying to remember or
00;09;12;15 - 00;09;19;24
Speaker 1
if you’re listening and you’re trying to digest, what does this mean for me or for somebody that I’m working for,
00;09;19;24 - 00;09;23;18
Speaker 1
to remember, well, gosh, which version was in the final version of the bill?
00;09;23;18 - 00;09;24;23
Speaker 1
So, Dianne,
00;09;24;23 - 00;09;26;29
Speaker 1
maybe we start on the international side.
00;09;26;29 - 00;09;33;22
Speaker 1
Because again, this obviously is a wide-ranging bill. There’s a lot to what we’re going to unpack. A lot of aspects of it, but what did we see there
00;09;33;22 - 00;09;34;08
Speaker 1
and
00;09;34;08 - 00;09;35;02
Speaker 1
where
00;09;35;02 - 00;09;36;10
Speaker 1
did we land, I guess?
00;09;36;19 - 00;09;39;17
Speaker 3
The biggest thing is the provision that
00;09;39;17 - 00;09;52;14
Speaker 3
garnered the most publicity is not there in the final. So something that was brand new law that was supposedly going to be a revenue raiser, something that was,
00;09;52;14 - 00;10;01;21
Speaker 3
very international in its touch, but it affected companies and individuals, Section 899, it’s not there in the final.
00;10;01;21 - 00;10;02;29
Speaker 3
It was in there in the House.
00;10;02;29 - 00;10;19;13
Speaker 3
There was further negotiation the first time with the Senate dropping down some of the withholding and, oh, this tax will be less and we’re going to negotiate. And then, lo and behold, shortly before the passage, Treasury Secretary communicates to Congress,
00;10;19;13 - 00;10;44;01
Speaker 3
we’re doing deals and it doesn’t need to be included altogether. And what it would have been would have been an additional tax on foreign citizens or residents or foreign companies, particularly those that were resident or organized in jurisdictions that imposed what was determined to be an unfair tax on the US.
00;10;44;03 - 00;10;44;16
Speaker 3
So it
00;10;44;16 - 00;10;49;26
Speaker 3
was aimed at these OECD Pillar One and Pillar Two provisions that
00;10;49;26 - 00;11;05;19
Speaker 3
a lot of people thought might be unfairly borne by US tech companies. I’m sure we can insert a few names of who those might be and there was a lot of press around it. There was a lot of fear on whether this would
00;11;05;19 - 00;11;13;04
Speaker 3
slow down investment into the US, if suddenly your US sourced income is going to be subject to higher tax rates.
00;11;13;08 - 00;11;31;13
Speaker 3
And again, this could operate on top of treaty tax rates. Suddenly, the US may not be such an attractive place to place your investment, but that’s all scrapped. So all the time we spent digging into it and learning all the ins and outs, who’s an applicable person? What’s an unfair tax?
00;11;31;13 - 00;11;38;02
Speaker 3
It was time well spent, but it is ultimately shelved for perhaps another administration, another day.
00;11;38;02 - 00;11;39;20
Speaker 3
We don’t see that.
00;11;39;20 - 00;11;40;01
Speaker 3
And that’s
00;11;40;01 - 00;11;46;09
Speaker 3
the biggest takeaway. There are some movements on the international provisions.
00;11;46;09 - 00;11;55;03
Speaker 3
Everyone talks about Gilti, FDII, BEAT. Gilti specifically does affect individuals. It is a tax,
00;11;55;03 - 00;11;56;06
Speaker 3
that is on your
00;11;56;06 - 00;11;59;00
Speaker 3
foreign investments. It’s encouraging you.
00;11;59;00 - 00;12;07;21
Speaker 3
The administration says it’s encouraging you to try to bring in that good asset income to the US instead of housing it outside the US.
00;12;07;24 - 00;12;19;27
Speaker 3
Those provisions, Gilti, FDII, beat, they weren’t going to go away in this cliff in 25. But the deductions that you would have been able to recognize were going to be dramatically reduced.
00;12;19;27 - 00;12;31;10
Speaker 3
Instead, with the new legislation, they’re only slightly reduced, and they’re made permanent. So that’s great and that we don’t have to all learn an entirely new set of rules.
00;12;31;10 - 00;12;42;15
Speaker 3
We get to just extend with some minor tweaks to some of the percentages, some of the foreign tax credits. So that’s great. That’s something that can be done in little bite-sized
00;12;42;15 - 00;12;48;14
Speaker 3
chunks instead of one big fell swoop of learning an entirely new foreign tax
00;12;48;14 - 00;12;49;20
Speaker 3
application.
00;12;49;20 - 00;12;50;26
Speaker 3
One thing that is
00;12;50;26 - 00;12;52;18
Speaker 3
good news to some of
00;12;52;18 - 00;13;01;28
Speaker 3
our people, though, is there was something called the 958(b)(4) repeal on downward attribution that TCJA did.
00;13;02;05 - 00;13;02;13
Speaker 3
It
00;13;02;13 - 00;13;27;00
Speaker 3
repealed this bar on letting there be attribution from these foreign-owned companies to US companies, ultimately to determine that they are US shareholders of a controlled foreign corporation. And it inadvertently hit a lot of us individuals who had investments, maybe with their families who were foreign and there were US companies and foreign companies in the mix.
00;13;27;06 - 00;13;33;26
Speaker 3
There were downstream US companies with foreign-owned foreign companies that previously did not impose
00;13;33;26 - 00;13;35;07
Speaker 3
big reporting
00;13;35;07 - 00;13;59;03
Speaker 3
burdens on individuals and with that repeal in TcJa, suddenly this attribution game was just there were no rules. There were no bars on 318. Everything could apply. And there was a lot of increased reporting. Well, that has been tweaked, 958 before is back in the code, there’s another provision.
00;13;59;05 - 00;14;14;00
Speaker 3
951 cap B that’s also in the code to make sure they’re capturing the type of foreign owned US shareholder, foreign companies that they want to for reporting and for purposes of gilti and Subpart F and alike.
00;14;14;09 - 00;14;19;19
Speaker 3
That’ll be a welcome fix to a lot of our high-income individuals who invest abroad.
00;14;19;21 - 00;14;21;17
Speaker 1
Got it. Yeah. No, that was an
00;14;21;17 - 00;14;22;09
Speaker 1
interesting one that
00;14;22;09 - 00;14;26;00
Speaker 1
slid in there. Maybe again, Tony, to your point, I’m talking about 899 here,
00;14;26;00 - 00;14;26;28
Speaker 1
that
00;14;26;28 - 00;14;32;26
Speaker 1
just the time that transpired or lapsed between the versions, it almost seemed like it was like,
00;14;32;26 - 00;14;35;13
Speaker 1
here today, gone tomorrow, like to a certain extent.
00;14;35;13 - 00;14;36;08
Speaker 1
I don’t know, Tony, if that was
00;14;36;08 - 00;14;37;12
Speaker 1
your experience or
00;14;37;12 - 00;14;42;19
Speaker 1
maybe again, there’s an echo of this with a lot of these changes that happened as we came down the finish line.
00;14;42;21 - 00;14;43;26
Speaker 2
Yeah, you’re absolutely right.
00;14;43;26 - 00;14;49;07
Speaker 2
We can see the same thing happen with these key tech changes, which,
00;14;49;07 - 00;14;52;12
Speaker 2
oh yeah, we could talk about this as well.
00;14;52;15 - 00;14;54;27
Speaker 1
Let’s do it. Let’s unpack that one for sure.
00;14;54;29 - 00;14;55;16
Speaker 2
And so,
00;14;55;16 - 00;14;57;15
Speaker 2
we won’t bury the lead here.
00;14;57;15 - 00;14;58;29
Speaker 2
The headline maker
00;14;58;29 - 00;15;05;29
Speaker 2
of the legislation is just that we are extending the current tax rate structure, right, for individuals,
00;15;05;29 - 00;15;13;26
Speaker 2
because those are all slated to expire at the end of 2025 and so that top rate will remain 37% and won’t jump back up to 39.6.
00;15;13;26 - 00;15;17;04
Speaker 2
All the lower rates have been retained as well. And so,
00;15;17;04 - 00;15;20;01
Speaker 2
it’s funny like we get so into some of these,
00;15;20;01 - 00;15;24;20
Speaker 2
unique specific provisions that we sometimes forget that,
00;15;24;20 - 00;15;27;27
Speaker 2
what most people are interested in is what’s my rate going to be next year? And,
00;15;27;27 - 00;15;29;17
Speaker 2
those rates are going to be retained.
00;15;29;17 - 00;15;30;11
Speaker 2
But then,
00;15;30;11 - 00;15;32;25
Speaker 2
from there, Damien, in my world,
00;15;32;25 - 00;15;32;27
Speaker 2
think
00;15;32;27 - 00;15;39;09
Speaker 2
about breaking these critical provisions that are going to impact
00;15;39;09 - 00;15;41;21
Speaker 2
my clients into a couple different buckets.
00;15;41;21 - 00;15;53;04
Speaker 2
And in the first bucket were three provisions that had bipartisan support, even though we didn’t need it here using the reconciliation process that everyone was hoping would get done.
00;15;53;04 - 00;16;01;26
Speaker 2
And these were unique in the sense that they were a little bit different than what Dianne experienced in the international side, where we didn’t see much change. And what I’m referring to here is,
00;16;01;26 - 00;16;05;25
Speaker 2
getting relief from the requirement to capitalize R&D,
00;16;05;25 - 00;16;08;29
Speaker 2
the changes in the way 163(j)
00;16;08;29 - 00;16;16;08
Speaker 2
80(i) was going to be calculated, adjusted taxable income and then the phase out of 100% bonus.
00;16;16;08 - 00;16;24;23
Speaker 2
Those three things were all revenue raisers in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The R&D capitalization requirement kicked in, in 2022.
00;16;24;23 - 00;16;29;01
Speaker 2
Bonus depreciation being phased down 20% a year from 100,
00;16;29;01 - 00;16;48;13
Speaker 2
started in 2023. And then same thing for the change in the way we computed the 163(j) limit. And so the House, the Senate, everybody was pretty consistent in the sense that, hey, we need relief from those three revenue raisers, even though ironically enough, right, they were enacted as part of the TCJA.
00;16;48;16 - 00;16;50;04
Speaker 2
And so we got those three things.
00;16;50;04 - 00;16;50;18
Speaker 2
They didn’t
00;16;50;18 - 00;17;03;16
Speaker 2
undergo the change that we saw on the international side with Dianne or as I’m going to refer to as some of these other provisions on the domestic side. And so those are certainly three big things that come out of the legislation.
00;17;03;16 - 00;17;11;21
Speaker 2
It’s just that we can now, again, at least from a domestic perspective, expense, our R&D costs are still a requirement to capitalize your foreign R&D.
00;17;11;21 - 00;17;20;25
Speaker 2
But we’ve got the ability to immediately deduct domestic R&D. We’ve got some relief in our 163(j) computation. And then,
00;17;20;25 - 00;17;32;09
Speaker 2
we have 100% bonus back, which is a big, big deal, obviously, for assets placed in service after January 19th of 2025. And so those three, yeah, they
00;17;32;09 - 00;17;38;07
Speaker 2
just were big priorities for both chambers. And they just more or less stayed
00;17;38;07 - 00;17;40;18
Speaker 2
consistent as we evolved.
00;17;40;20 - 00;17;43;15
Speaker 2
But then you get into that next bucket that I’ve
00;17;43;15 - 00;17;44;12
Speaker 2
been focused on
00;17;44;12 - 00;17;46;18
Speaker 2
and the first that I wanted to
00;17;46;18 - 00;17;49;04
Speaker 2
talk about is 199 cap A,
00;17;49;04 - 00;17;56;28
Speaker 2
because that’s one of those, Damien, where if you’ve been following along and reading about this stuff, you may not know, like where did things eventually land?
00;17;56;28 - 00;17;57;27
Speaker 2
Because,
00;17;57;27 - 00;18;17;24
Speaker 2
when the House initially released their bill, they were talking about, hey, let’s take that 20% 199 cap A pass-through deduction and let’s ratchet that thing up to 23%, which is obviously meaningful. And then at the same time, the House was going to change the way the phaseout rules work in a way that was
00;18;17;24 - 00;18;21;04
Speaker 2
going to allow a lot of owners of specified service trades or businesses,
00;18;21;04 - 00;18;32;07
Speaker 2
so your doctors, lawyers, accountants, actors, athletes to allow them to get deductions that they weren’t entitled to under current law. But then the Senate came in and just said,
00;18;32;07 - 00;18;34;09
Speaker 2
we’re going to take a different tack here.
00;18;34;09 - 00;18;45;11
Speaker 2
We’re going to keep the percentage at 20. We’re not going to ratchet it up to 23 and then we’re just going to do more of a subtle tweak to the existing phase out, such that these owners of SSTBs
00;18;45;11 - 00;18;48;11
Speaker 2
aren’t going to benefit the way they would have under the House bill.
00;18;48;13 - 00;18;53;10
Speaker 2
And that Senate bill, obviously, is what ultimately won out. And so here we are with,
00;18;53;10 - 00;18;55;18
Speaker 2
199 cap A is permanent now.
00;18;55;18 - 00;19;01;04
Speaker 2
But it is at that 20% deduction amount. And it is, like I said, more of a
00;19;01;04 - 00;19;08;07
Speaker 2
subtle reworking, increase, if you will, the phase out range where SSTBs will start to lose the deduction.
00;19;08;07 - 00;19;09;07
Speaker 2
And,
00;19;09;07 - 00;19;14;08
Speaker 2
the deduction will be limited more based on W-2 wages and property basis,
00;19;14;08 - 00;19;18;07
Speaker 2
just as it is under current law. And so that’s one where we had,
00;19;18;07 - 00;19;23;29
Speaker 2
pretty big differences between the House and Senate’s vision for 199 cap A and the Senate won out.
00;19;23;29 - 00;19;29;00
Speaker 2
The more fascinating one, when eventually the story gets told about how this
00;19;29;00 - 00;19;34;18
Speaker 2
proverbial sausage was made here with this legislation was what the heck happened with PTET?
00;19;34;19 - 00;19;35;20
Speaker 2
Because,
00;19;35;20 - 00;19;40;14
Speaker 2
a point of contention all along in this legislation was what we call the salt cap,
00;19;40;14 - 00;19;41;27
Speaker 2
state and local tax
00;19;41;27 - 00;19;55;08
Speaker 2
limitation that was enacted as part of the TCJA. Big revenue raiser on the TCJA said that individuals can’t deduct more than $10,000 of state and local taxes and as you can imagine,
00;19;55;28 - 00;20;04;09
Speaker 2
high income tax states, New York, New Jersey, California, obviously they were not fans of that, but it was much more than those three states you had.
00;20;04;10 - 00;20;09;06
Speaker 2
It’s up to 36 states now that basically adopted a workaround. They said,
00;20;09;06 - 00;20;36;00
Speaker 2
what we’re going to do for pass-through businesses like partnerships and S corporations, we’re going to allow those pass-through businesses to pay tax on the business’s income at the entity level over to the state and then we will allow them to pass out basically a credit to the owners that they can claim against their state tax liability for the taxes paid on their behalf by the pass-through entity.
00;20;36;02 - 00;20;37;23
Speaker 2
And so this was going to
00;20;37;23 - 00;21;00;18
Speaker 2
circumvent this $10,000 cap that was enacted as part of the TCJA by just saying, well, we’ll just take that state and local tax deduction and we’ll move it to the entity level. Of course, we needed that to be blessed by the service and that happened in notice 2020-75, where the IRS said, look, if a pass-through entity pays this entity level tax
00;21;00;18 - 00;21;01;15
Speaker 2
in one of these
00;21;01;15 - 00;21;08;16
Speaker 2
regimes that have been adopted by the states will allow the pass-through entity to simply deduct that at the entity level.
00;21;08;16 - 00;21;23;17
Speaker 2
So it reduces the income that passes through to the owners. And so that deduction is now being claimed at the entity level, where there is no limitation rather than at the individual level where there’s this $10,000 cap. And so we’ve been living in that PTET regime
00;21;23;17 - 00;21;29;22
Speaker 2
for quite a while now and when the initial House bill came out, we were all
00;21;29;22 - 00;21;33;06
Speaker 2
scrambling to figure out what it was they were trying to do.
00;21;33;07 - 00;21;54;14
Speaker 2
Because first things first, before we even think about the PTET regime, we knew, as I said earlier, the point of contention was going to be, what are we doing about this $10,000 salt cap? And the House wanted to increase it to $40,000. And of course, there were people in the House, New York, New Jersey, California that wanted to see it lifted entirely.
00;21;54;14 - 00;21;57;03
Speaker 2
There were people on the other side that wanted to see,
00;21;57;03 - 00;21;57;19
Speaker 2
even,
00;21;57;19 - 00;22;00;05
Speaker 2
corporations not be able to deduct their state and local taxes
00;22;00;05 - 00;22;11;13
Speaker 2
all over the board, but ultimately that House legislation said we are going to cap the individual tax at $40,000. But more importantly, it was
00;22;11;13 - 00;22;12;26
Speaker 2
taking aim
00;22;12;26 - 00;22;14;23
Speaker 2
at these PTET regimes.
00;22;14;26 - 00;22;32;22
Speaker 2
And the House bill was pretty unique in the sense that it said pass-through entities won’t be able to deduct the state and local taxes they now pay at the entity level. Instead, they’re going to have to separately state these amounts and allocate it among the owners. And then at the owner level, you’re going to have to
00;22;32;22 - 00;22;33;17
Speaker 2
take a hard look at,
00;22;33;17 - 00;22;36;24
Speaker 2
what type of business just allocated you,
00;22;36;24 - 00;22;38;13
Speaker 2
that tax.
00;22;38;13 - 00;22;51;22
Speaker 2
Because if it was an investment activity and not a business or if it was one of those aforementioned specified service trades or businesses, I referenced under 199 cap A, your doctors, lawyers, accountants, actors, athletes, you weren’t going to be able to benefit at all
00;22;51;22 - 00;22;58;25
Speaker 2
from the PTET payment that the entity made on your behalf. So we were all scrambling, figuring out, oh, man, what does this mean?
00;22;58;25 - 00;23;00;26
Speaker 2
Who wins? Who loses?
00;23;00;26 - 00;23;05;07
Speaker 2
And then the Senate came out with
00;23;05;07 - 00;23;11;09
Speaker 2
a one-two punch where one they said, well, we’re going to start negotiations with a $10,000 salt cap, but it’s
00;23;11;09 - 00;23;22;08
Speaker 2
just going to be a placeholder until we can figure out what number we need to settle on that will appease the House. And then they also took aim at the PTET regime, but just in a different way.
00;23;22;08 - 00;23;25;11
Speaker 2
Rather than saying certain
00;23;25;11 - 00;23;32;03
Speaker 2
service businesses are out they came up with more of just a mathematical limitation where you could
00;23;32;03 - 00;23;35;20
Speaker 2
deduct the greater of $40,000
00;23;35;20 - 00;23;44;06
Speaker 2
of your share of the PTET payment or 50% of your allocable share of the PTET payment paid by the entity. But long story short,
00;23;44;06 - 00;23;54;21
Speaker 2
they were also trying to effectively put an end, at least in large part to this pass-through entity tax regime that had been created by these 36 states.
00;23;54;23 - 00;24;15;02
Speaker 2
And so we were all preparing ourselves for, all right, which one is going to win out and how is that going to impact our clients and whatever it may be, when all of a sudden and this goes back to what you were saying about 899 like here today, gone tomorrow, we woke up one day and the cap was moved to $40,000, but the PTET language was just gone,
00;24;15;02 - 00;24;23;05
Speaker 2
and more people that you can imagine were reaching out to me saying, am I just missing it somewhere in the legislation? Like, did they just move it somewhere? But,
00;24;23;05 - 00;24;28;21
Speaker 2
no, it was just removed from the legislation. So the PTET regime is suddenly and
00;24;28;21 - 00;24;32;03
Speaker 2
unexpectedly alive and well. And now,
00;24;32;03 - 00;24;43;29
Speaker 2
these owners of pass-through businesses can still deduct these payments at the entity level and basically work around even what is now the $40,000 cap at the individual level.
00;24;44;02 - 00;24;44;28
Speaker 2
So that was
00;24;44;28 - 00;24;49;12
Speaker 2
a very interesting last minute development. But that’s one,
00;24;49;12 - 00;25;02;24
Speaker 2
Damien and Dianne, that a lot of people had their eyes on. The last provision I wanted to talk about with you guys is one that I don’t think got a lot of attention, but I know, like the real tax eggheads out there that have to follow this stuff,
00;25;02;26 - 00;25;06;05
Speaker 2
they were like, this was a good development
00;25;06;05 - 00;25;06;16
Speaker 2
when
00;25;06;16 - 00;25;11;11
Speaker 2
it eventually came to pass. And what I’m referring to there is Section 461(l).
00;25;11;11 - 00;25;30;08
Speaker 2
Also born as part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, this was a revenue raiser where it said if you’re the owner of a business and that business allocates you a loss, we know that we have other hurdles in the tax law before you get to utilize that loss, whether it’s having basis or being at risk or whether it’s a passive activity.
00;25;30;14 - 00;25;46;12
Speaker 2
But even if you survive those three, we’re going to make you throw all your business income and all your business losses into a bucket and net them all together. And the maximum business loss you can take in a year is $500,000 if you’re married, half that if you’re single. And that’s what
00;25;46;12 - 00;25;49;04
Speaker 2
came about with the Tcja.
00;25;49;06 - 00;26;13;27
Speaker 2
But the catch is, as originally enacted, any loss in excess of those thresholds basically converted into a net operating loss. So it effectively acted as a one year deferral because, okay, you can’t take that excess loss this year, but next year it becomes an NOL and I’m going to be able to utilize that against my non-business sources of income, like W-2 wages and investment income next year.
00;26;13;29 - 00;26;41;18
Speaker 2
But then the House comes out with a proposal to say we’re going to make 461(l) permanent. But in addition, we’re going to make any excess business losses go through the calculation again every year. So instead of just converting into an NOL and freeing up the next year, we’re going to take that loss you couldn’t take in year one and put it back into that bucket in year two and see to what extent you’re able to utilize it under that
00;26;41;21 - 00;26;49;17
Speaker 2
math that I discussed earlier. And then the Senate proposed the exact same thing. And this was going to be
00;26;49;17 - 00;26;52;04
Speaker 2
rough because what did we say earlier?
00;26;52;04 - 00;27;11;28
Speaker 2
One of the big headliners of this legislation was going to be the return of a 100% bonus depreciation. But if you take a 100% bonus depreciation and generate a loss from a business, and now you run into this 461(l) problem where you generate a big loss as a one-time event,
00;27;12;00 - 00;27;20;13
Speaker 2
if you’re not generating that business income in the future, able to offset that loss, like you were just going to chip away at that loss, $500,000
00;27;20;13 - 00;27;21;02
Speaker 2
a year,
00;27;21;02 - 00;27;22;29
Speaker 2
index for inflation
00;27;22;29 - 00;27;28;11
Speaker 2
we’re over $600,000 now, but you get what I’m saying. Like, this was going to
00;27;28;11 - 00;27;33;10
Speaker 2
dull the effect in a lot of situations of bonus depreciation
00;27;33;13 - 00;27;39;10
Speaker 2
and the advantages that it brings by forcing a taxpayer to basically just
00;27;39;10 - 00;27;51;09
Speaker 2
have these excess losses reenter this computation every single year and just take a little piece at a time; a little piece at a time and there didn’t seem to be anybody
00;27;51;09 - 00;27;53;29
Speaker 2
leading the charge to say,
00;27;53;29 - 00;27;57;06
Speaker 2
we don’t want these changes to be enacted.
00;27;57;06 - 00;28;15;09
Speaker 2
But when the smoke cleared and the dust settled here, we had 461(l) made permanent, but they left out that requirement that any excess business losses reenter the computation every year. So we’re back to the existing regime of
00;28;15;09 - 00;28;24;24
Speaker 2
where it’s just going to convert into a net operating loss in the next year. And so it’s one of those things where I don’t even know how many business owners, right, know how close they came to
00;28;24;24 - 00;28;25;20
Speaker 2
potentially a
00;28;25;20 - 00;28;30;09
Speaker 2
tough consequence if those changes had come to pass under 461(l).
00;28;30;09 - 00;28;33;08
Speaker 2
But it’s not in the final law. And so,
00;28;33;08 - 00;28;35;21
Speaker 2
it’s not something we have to wrestle with. But
00;28;35;21 - 00;28;37;00
Speaker 2
those two things were just
00;28;37;00 - 00;28;42;12
Speaker 2
last minute changes that are going to be very taxpayer friendly, the change to the PTET rules and then 461(l).
00;28;42;13 - 00;28;46;10
Speaker 1
Yeah and again, to this here’s today gone tomorrow thing,
00;28;46;19 - 00;28;52;03
Speaker 1
I know I was double checking; did I miss something with this 461(l) thing with the two of you
00;28;52;03 - 00;28;53;29
Speaker 1
messaging back and forth? Because it did, it was
00;28;53;29 - 00;28;56;29
Speaker 1
understated, but not to be understated in its
00;28;56;29 - 00;28;58;15
Speaker 1
implications for sure.
00;28;58;15 - 00;29;09;27
Speaker 3
There was more movement in the lobbying than I definitely understood. Because you’re right, Tony, there was so little press surrounding this, but I was on a private interest call,
00;29;09;27 - 00;29;21;10
Speaker 3
the middle of last week and there were several groups on there saying, oh my goodness, we were lobbying hard for this to be removed because the impacts would have been devastating.
00;29;21;10 - 00;29;23;07
Speaker 3
Like you said, you generate that
00;29;23;07 - 00;29;42;12
Speaker 3
large loss. Oh, great bonus depreciation. But nope, you can’t use it, but for a tiny bit at a time. So apparently it got a little bit more attention from the actual eggheads who are talking to their people that are going to talk to Congress than it did in the actual press, which is good.
00;29;42;12 - 00;29;55;08
Speaker 2
A day or two before that final Senate legislation came out, I was on a unrelated call with some people in the know from other Big Four firms and they were just saying, I don’t know if anyone’s out there banging the drum for this,
00;29;55;08 - 00;30;00;00
Speaker 2
to get this 461(l) change pulled out, but I guess somebody was because–
00;30;00;00 - 00;30;13;21
Speaker 3
Oh, I was telling groups don’t expect this to be removed. You need to just plan for it now because nobody cares and it’s going to stay in there and then look, this is at least we’re pleasantly surprised with that one.
00;30;14;12 - 00;30;22;00
Speaker 1
Absolutely. Yeah. And to your point, I was saying the same thing because it was in the House and the Senate versions. So you look at it and say, well, gosh, like that didn’t
00;30;22;00 - 00;30;22;18
Speaker 1
change.
00;30;22;18 - 00;30;24;24
Speaker 1
Whereas some of the other things you talk PTET,
00;30;24;24 - 00;30;27;14
Speaker 1
that’s a pretty big difference between the House and the Senate versions.
00;30;27;19 - 00;30;28;15
Speaker 1
Not this one,
00;30;28;15 - 00;30;31;07
Speaker 1
but final — it fell out. So,
00;30;31;07 - 00;30;32;17
Speaker 1
very good news for sure.
00;30;32;20 - 00;30;32;27
Speaker 2
Yeah.
00;30;32;27 - 00;30;40;14
Speaker 2
There’s probably only a handful of provisions that had identical language between House and Senate and 461(l) was one of them. So there was no reason to believe that
00;30;40;14 - 00;30;48;27
Speaker 2
they were going to view it any differently than the way they initially proposed it. But yeah, this is one of those where I don’t think a lot of people maybe even know how close they came to a
00;30;48;27 - 00;30;50;10
Speaker 2
tough consequence
00;30;50;10 - 00;30;51;17
Speaker 2
and they don’t need to know because
00;30;51;17 - 00;30;54;11
Speaker 2
it’s a good answer at the end of the day.
00;30;54;15 - 00;31;01;09
Speaker 1
It raises or illustrates a good point, which is and maybe this is a takeaway as we think forward of
00;31;01;09 - 00;31;02;05
Speaker 1
digesting and
00;31;02;05 - 00;31;05;17
Speaker 1
where do we go from here on — you got to run the numbers,
00;31;05;17 - 00;31;10;05
Speaker 1
now it’s very evident coming out of TCJA when we got 461(l) in the first place.
00;31;10;05 - 00;31;11;10
Speaker 1
I kept telling people,
00;31;11;10 - 00;31;12;29
Speaker 1
you’re back of the napkin math.
00;31;12;29 - 00;31;15;09
Speaker 1
We haven’t been at back of the napkin math for a while, but
00;31;15;09 - 00;31;19;10
Speaker 1
you particularly have to be careful with some of these layers of loss limitations.
00;31;19;10 - 00;31;19;28
Speaker 1
And
00;31;19;28 - 00;31;25;23
Speaker 1
where were we’re going to need to go with this too and Dianne, maybe I’ll kick it over to you to talk through some of these changes.
00;31;25;23 - 00;31;31;20
Speaker 1
But I know we saw some changes on the itemized deduction front too, charitables and just overall on itemized. And it can
00;31;31;20 - 00;31;32;16
Speaker 1
require some
00;31;32;16 - 00;31;34;14
Speaker 1
crunch on the numbers, so to speak,
00;31;34;14 - 00;31;37;21
Speaker 1
to figure that out. So maybe you can talk through some of those changes.
00;31;37;23 - 00;31;54;24
Speaker 3
No, and that’s, you’ll have to crunch the numbers because the value of your itemized deductions, if you’re in the highest income tax bracket this year, will be greater than the value of those same itemized deductions next year. So that’s something to
00;31;54;24 - 00;32;04;21
Speaker 3
look at because there were two changes, I guess maybe tiny minutia revenue raisers since we lost 899, 461(l) ended up happily.
00;32;04;21 - 00;32;12;08
Speaker 3
The salt cap is so big, they’re looking for small pushes to raise revenue maybe and this looked like an easy one.
00;32;12;08 - 00;32;22;00
Speaker 1
Based on the questions we’ve been fielding and the conversations we’ve been having, these new limitations can be a bit confusing, so I wanted to take a moment to illustrate with a quick example.
00;32;22;03 - 00;32;50;06
Speaker 1
Let’s say you report $10 million of ordinary income each year and you have planned to make a charitable contribution of $1 million. In 2025, the federal benefit of that $1 million charitable donation would be $370,000, which is calculated as $1 million multiplied by the top 37% tax rate. Now, applying the two new limitations Dianne just mentioned for 2026, your charitable deduction is first reduced by a 0.5% of your modified adjusted gross income
00;32;50;06 - 00;33;16;11
Speaker 1
floor, which amounts to $50,000. On top of that, there’s an additional limitation that caps for itemized deductions by about 5.4% or 237ths, which effectively reduces the federal tax benefit of your deduction to 35% when offsetting ordinary income for those in the top 37% bracket. For those that are taxed in the long-term capital gains rates of 20%, that benefit drops to 19%.
00;33;16;13 - 00;33;48;14
Speaker 1
So when we do the math here on your situation, you would see an additional reduction of $51,351 to your charitable donation on top of the $50,000 floor. This means your adjusted deduction would be $898,649, providing a federal tax benefit of $332,500 since it offsets income at the top 37% rate. So, in sum, the federal tax benefit of your million dollar contribution would be $37,500 greater in 2025 than in 2026
00;33;48;14 - 00;33;50;16
Speaker 1
due to these two new provisions.
00;33;50;23 - 00;33;59;13
Speaker 3
So no, it’s not the big number that’s going to generate lots of press. But for a lot of people, a lot of clients, a lot of people,
00;33;59;13 - 00;34;03;23
Speaker 3
people you may work for, it is a somewhat material difference.
00;34;04;00 - 00;34;05;06
Speaker 3
And so that’s when you’re
00;34;05;06 - 00;34;08;20
Speaker 3
thinking the value this year versus the value next year.
00;34;08;20 - 00;34;11;13
Speaker 3
And that’s going to make a difference.
00;34;11;25 - 00;34;12;07
Speaker 1
Yeah.
00;34;12;07 - 00;34;12;18
Speaker 1
it’s going to
00;34;12;18 - 00;34;18;19
Speaker 1
make planning interesting. And obviously we can get to some of these, where do we go with it and whatnot. But
00;34;18;19 - 00;34;19;24
Speaker 1
even to say,
00;34;19;24 - 00;34;23;11
Speaker 1
if you got that floor and timing becomes a lot of
00;34;23;11 - 00;34;25;25
Speaker 1
what we’re going to start to consider with a lot of this,
00;34;25;25 - 00;34;26;07
Speaker 1
and
00;34;26;07 - 00;34;29;27
Speaker 1
it starts to matter for some of the charitable organizations as well and all that.
00;34;29;28 - 00;34;30;23
Speaker 1
So, yeah, it’s going to be
00;34;30;23 - 00;34;33;08
Speaker 1
interesting to see how that provision in particular
00;34;33;08 - 00;34;35;03
Speaker 1
impacts
00;34;35;03 - 00;34;36;07
Speaker 1
outcomes.
00;34;36;07 - 00;34;42;07
Speaker 3
I think it’s going to impact budgets for next year for some of these charities. And like we were saying,
00;34;42;07 - 00;34;54;09
Speaker 3
so many changes, there was a lot of press around private foundations and oh, these excise tax and things like that. Yes, all of that went away. But again, these tiny little changes here, they do have ripple effects.
00;34;54;10 - 00;34;58;27
Speaker 3
You’re going to see some effect in future years because of even the small change.
00;34;58;27 - 00;35;03;09
Speaker 2
If I’ve proven nothing else in our 10 years of friendship, it’s that
00;35;03;09 - 00;35;18;04
Speaker 2
my knowledge of the tax law pretty much is limited to your domestic income taxes. But like clearly there’s also movement here in the One Big Beautiful bill from an estate tax perspective and as Dianne just mentioned, from an exempt org perspective.
00;35;18;06 - 00;35;18;17
Speaker 2
And
00;35;18;17 - 00;35;19;14
Speaker 2
yeah,
00;35;19;14 - 00;35;22;25
Speaker 2
give us a little bit about what’s going on there because
00;35;22;25 - 00;35;24;03
Speaker 2
all my focus
00;35;24;03 - 00;35;26;01
Speaker 2
was on the income tax side.
00;35;26;03 - 00;35;27;19
Speaker 1
Yeah,
00;35;27;19 - 00;35;31;15
Speaker 1
again, probably the overall headline on a lot of this, right, is,
00;35;31;15 - 00;35;36;14
Speaker 1
we’re talking about some of these things where we saw changes. But the big headline is we got a lot of
00;35;36;14 - 00;35;39;12
Speaker 1
“permanent” changes here now,
00;35;39;12 - 00;35;41;11
Speaker 1
unlike the TcJa where our
00;35;41;11 - 00;35;43;25
Speaker 1
individual provisions were expiring, like you said,
00;35;43;25 - 00;35;49;20
Speaker 1
Tony, if nothing had happened and we woke up on January 1st of next year,
00;35;49;20 - 00;35;50;08
Speaker 1
and
00;35;50;08 - 00;35;53;26
Speaker 1
now they’re permanent, I say “permanent” because obviously,
00;35;53;26 - 00;35;55;29
Speaker 1
permanent is only as permanent as the next law.
00;35;55;29 - 00;36;02;12
Speaker 1
It just means that nothing happens absent future legislation, which is the opposite of where we’ve been, which is in a state of
00;36;02;14 - 00;36;12;27
Speaker 1
this cliff, if you will, that was hanging off to the end and particularly in the estate planning space, right, where the lifetime exemption, the amount that
00;36;12;27 - 00;36;15;28
Speaker 1
you can give away; I can give away during my lifetime or at death
00;36;16;09 - 00;36;16;26
Speaker 1
per person,
00;36;16;26 - 00;36;21;09
Speaker 1
it is currently the highest it’s ever been.
00;36;21;09 - 00;36;26;25
Speaker 1
It’s $13.99 million. It’s an inflation adjusted number. It was $5 million adjusted for inflation,
00;36;26;25 - 00;36;28;04
Speaker 1
or $10 million adjusted for inflation.
00;36;28;04 - 00;36;33;12
Speaker 1
We would have gone back to $5 million adjusted for inflation, absent nothing happening. But again,
00;36;33;12 - 00;36;39;12
Speaker 1
spoiler alert, we basically got permanency and we didn’t get the lifetime exemption getting cut in half.
00;36;39;14 - 00;36;45;23
Speaker 1
We’d go to $15 million next year and then adjust annually inferred inflation after 26 and going forward.
00;36;46;05 - 00;36;47;08
Speaker 1
So
00;36;47;08 - 00;36;55;24
Speaker 1
what that means though, with a lot of these things, it makes planning a little bit more, I guess, permanent, if you will, right? To say that
00;36;55;24 - 00;37;00;04
Speaker 1
the age-old advice with estate planning is if it makes sense to do estate planning,
00;37;00;04 - 00;37;02;11
Speaker 1
the best day to do it was perhaps yesterday.
00;37;02;11 - 00;37;05;01
Speaker 1
And then the next best day is today, is to say that
00;37;05;01 - 00;37;09;27
Speaker 1
when you’re facing estate tax liability, which, by the way, that number is less than 1%,
00;37;09;27 - 00;37;11;23
Speaker 1
is the statistical number of
00;37;11;23 - 00;37;14;11
Speaker 1
estates that are taxable
00;37;14;11 - 00;37;16;06
Speaker 1
with the exemptions where they are,
00;37;16;06 - 00;37;19;10
Speaker 1
but it’s a very meaningful number and you need to do the planning for that.
00;37;19;18 - 00;37;23;09
Speaker 1
The same is true because a lot like the other side of the coin, if you will,
00;37;23;09 - 00;37;32;22
Speaker 1
with a lot of the planning and the conversations I have with families and family offices and those that we’re working with, right, is you’re looking at the legacy and passing on and thinking about
00;37;32;22 - 00;37;37;05
Speaker 1
that’s where the estate tax and some of the wealth transfer techniques come into play there
00;37;37;05 - 00;37;38;23
Speaker 1
and thinking about that,
00;37;38;23 - 00;37;41;05
Speaker 1
the next piece is thinking about the charitable piece
00;37;41;05 - 00;37;43;11
Speaker 1
and component, and yeah,
00;37;43;11 - 00;37;44;23
Speaker 1
Dianne, you just mentioned some of these
00;37;44;23 - 00;37;47;18
Speaker 1
big changes. Well, maybe percentage changes, but
00;37;47;18 - 00;37;48;12
Speaker 1
they’re still big.
00;37;48;12 - 00;37;52;19
Speaker 1
There’s big numbers if you multiply them by big numbers.
00;37;52;19 - 00;37;52;29
Speaker 1
Exactly. So
00;37;52;29 - 00;37;57;26
Speaker 1
I’m seeing it pretty impactful in terms of curtailing the benefit of your giving
00;37;57;26 - 00;37;58;27
Speaker 1
on the deduction side.
00;37;59;03 - 00;38;02;04
Speaker 1
But then we were also potentially seeing some very large
00;38;02;04 - 00;38;11;26
Speaker 1
excise taxes, changes to excise taxes on net investment income. Again — you teed it up, right, to say the private foundations and certain
00;38;11;26 - 00;38;17;26
Speaker 1
private colleges and universities. Well, you talk about differences, Tony, between the House and the Senate,
00;38;17;26 - 00;38;19;04
Speaker 1
that’s where we saw a
00;38;19;04 - 00;38;24;15
Speaker 1
big difference in this area with these excise taxes, where the prior foundation changes,
00;38;24;15 - 00;38;27;07
Speaker 1
increasing that excise tax,
00;38;27;07 - 00;38;28;11
Speaker 1
basically fell off the table.
00;38;28;11 - 00;38;34;26
Speaker 1
Again, to your point, it wasn’t in the Senate bill and it’s not in the bill that was just signed into law by President Trump on July 4th.
00;38;35;10 - 00;38;38;07
Speaker 1
We also saw a big pullback in terms of
00;38;38;07 - 00;38;40;18
Speaker 1
what surprised perhaps many
00;38;40;18 - 00;38;45;27
Speaker 1
was the increase in the excise tax on those certain–
00;38;45;27 - 00;38;47;18
Speaker 1
private colleges and universities
00;38;47;18 - 00;38;49;23
Speaker 1
would have gone up to 21% on the high end well
00;38;49;24 - 00;38;58;21
Speaker 1
and now we go up to 8% on the high end. That was always in the Senate bill and that’s where we landed in the final version of the reconciliation bill. So again,
00;38;58;21 - 00;39;04;23
Speaker 1
there’s going to be a little bit of dust settling to happen there because certainly I know based on the conversations I was having
00;39;04;23 - 00;39;06;05
Speaker 1
around people thinking about,
00;39;06;05 - 00;39;20;13
Speaker 1
okay, that significantly influences how I’m going to perhaps invest my endowment or some of the decisions I’m going to make about that or if a foundation, right, to say how am I going to fund certain
00;39;20;13 - 00;39;22;20
Speaker 1
grants that we’re going to do out into the
00;39;22;20 - 00;39;23;19
Speaker 1
future and you
00;39;23;19 - 00;39;28;15
Speaker 1
have to start thinking and mapping out the investing impact and the
00;39;28;15 - 00;39;31;20
Speaker 1
drag of potential excise taxes, whereas now that’s
00;39;31;20 - 00;39;33;16
Speaker 1
been dialed back or
00;39;33;16 - 00;39;36;10
Speaker 1
eliminated in the case of private foundations. So
00;39;36;10 - 00;39;37;13
Speaker 1
that’s going to take a little bit of
00;39;37;13 - 00;39;39;15
Speaker 1
digesting and understanding there. But
00;39;39;15 - 00;39;40;05
Speaker 1
overall
00;39;40;05 - 00;39;41;11
Speaker 1
on both fronts,
00;39;41;13 - 00;39;42;20
Speaker 1
good news to taxpayers.
00;39;42;20 - 00;39;42;24
Speaker 1
And
00;39;42;24 - 00;39;44;10
Speaker 1
that’s probably the overall,
00;39;44;10 - 00;39;45;05
Speaker 1
of this to say
00;39;45;05 - 00;39;48;00
Speaker 1
that if you’re getting some permanency,
00;39;48;00 - 00;39;49;01
Speaker 1
we’re seeing some,
00;39;49;01 - 00;39;52;23
Speaker 1
again, the highest exemption is going to continue to go up and be the highest it’s ever been.
00;39;52;23 - 00;39;54;15
Speaker 1
So yeah, it’ll be, again,
00;39;54;15 - 00;39;58;06
Speaker 1
that’s where the next phase comes in to say, well, what does this mean
00;39;58;06 - 00;40;09;17
Speaker 1
for the rest of the year? And what does it mean for planning and where do we go with that? So maybe Tony, I’ll go to you first. Like, what are your thoughts on that? Dianne, I’m coming to you in a minute on this so that you get to think of the question, I guess, in advance.
00;40;09;17 - 00;40;10;11
Speaker 1
Good. But
00;40;10;11 - 00;40;21;06
Speaker 1
what do you think? And this is probably an evolving question of what you’re focusing on here in the back half of 25 and going forward as takeaways from this bill?
00;40;21;08 - 00;40;22;23
Speaker 2
Well, it’s funny and it tells you just how
00;40;22;23 - 00;40;26;10
Speaker 2
comprehensive this legislation was, is being honest,
00;40;26;10 - 00;40;34;17
Speaker 2
for the next few months, I’m going to be spending a lot of time in two provisions of the legislation that we haven’t even talked about yet on this,
00;40;34;17 - 00;40;36;28
Speaker 2
at this podcast and we’ve covered a whole heck of a lot of them.
00;40;36;28 - 00;40;37;29
Speaker 2
But
00;40;37;29 - 00;40;47;09
Speaker 2
I live a lot in the qualified small business stock space in Section 1202 and this was another fascinating one where the House released their bill and they
00;40;47;09 - 00;40;51;29
Speaker 2
didn’t have any QSBS proposal. But then the Senate comes out and
00;40;51;29 - 00;40;58;21
Speaker 2
offers what can only be described as a significant expansion of what is already an unbelievably unique and powerful provision.
00;40;58;21 - 00;41;05;14
Speaker 2
The 1202 allows a non-corporate shareholder to exclude from their taxable income
00;41;05;14 - 00;41;21;14
Speaker 2
up to 100% of the gain from the sale of this concept qualified small business stock that’s been held for more than five years and it’s exploded ever since the corporate rate was dropped from 35% to 21% as part of the TcJa, but the Senate comes in and nobody
00;41;21;14 - 00;41;22;29
Speaker 2
saw this coming.
00;41;23;01 - 00;41;36;26
Speaker 2
And they say, hey, we’re going to ratchet this benefit up in three ways. Number one, for stock issued after the date of enactment, we’ll give you a 50% exclusion after three years, 75% exclusion after four and then 100% after five, so
00;41;36;26 - 00;41;40;09
Speaker 2
the graduated exclusion that never existed before.
00;41;40;09 - 00;41;46;11
Speaker 2
And then there’s a $50 million asset threshold that you can’t have the corporation exceed
00;41;46;11 - 00;41;58;25
Speaker 2
when you acquire their stock, they’re going to raise that to $75 million, which means corporations are going to be able to issue a lot more of this QSBS. And then we have this cumulative limitation on how much you can exclude,
00;41;58;25 - 00;42;08;20
Speaker 2
which is the greater of $10 million or 10 times your investment. And the Senate bill and the final legislation increases that $10 million exclusion to $15 million.
00;42;08;21 - 00;42;15;01
Speaker 2
These are meaningful changes. So I am definitely anticipating a huge uptick in what was already a very
00;42;15;01 - 00;42;30;17
Speaker 2
busy area of the law, which is individuals, private equity, like looking to make investments in corporations that that are going to benefit from this qualified small business stock exclusion, what is now only three years down the road as compared to what used to be,
00;42;30;17 - 00;42;31;22
Speaker 2
had to make it to five years.
00;42;31;22 - 00;42;35;22
Speaker 2
So I’m guessing I’m going to spend a lot of time there, Damien,
00;42;35;22 - 00;42;47;09
Speaker 2
figuring out how to maximize QSBS benefits under this new regime. And then based on the way my day has been going so far today, I can tell I’ll be doing some work in the revamped opportunity zone
00;42;47;09 - 00;42;52;16
Speaker 2
regime that was born as part of this new legislation where
00;42;52;16 - 00;43;00;25
Speaker 2
we basically created a permanent presence in the code for the Opportunity Zone incentive that was born as part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
00;43;00;27 - 00;43;10;00
Speaker 2
And now we’re going to have rolling 10-year windows of Opportunity Zones, the ability to defer gain by investing into a qualified opportunity fund and be able to defer it
00;43;10;00 - 00;43;13;05
Speaker 2
for up to five years with this
00;43;13;05 - 00;43;23;05
Speaker 2
tariff still remaining there that’s existed since 2017 to sell your investment in a qualified opportunity fund after a 10-year holding period and exclude all of the gain.
00;43;23;08 - 00;43;26;01
Speaker 2
And so this was one of those things,
00;43;26;01 - 00;43;26;14
Speaker 2
as we were
00;43;26;14 - 00;43;31;24
Speaker 2
talking about earlier where it just wasn’t there, wasn’t there and then all of a sudden, it just popped up
00;43;31;24 - 00;43;34;02
Speaker 2
in the final Senate version and
00;43;34;02 - 00;43;34;16
Speaker 2
forced you to
00;43;34;16 - 00;43;37;27
Speaker 2
take a second look and say, do I appreciate just how meaningful this is?
00;43;37;27 - 00;43;39;18
Speaker 2
But yeah, I’ve had people
00;43;39;18 - 00;43;53;27
Speaker 2
calling for the last couple of days to say, hey, where did things finally land on this? Because this sounds very meaningful that I’m going to have opportunities to defer gain perpetually now into the future by investing into qualified opportunity funds. And so,
00;43;53;27 - 00;44;05;23
Speaker 2
that is where I imagine I’m going to be spending a lot of my time over the next few months helping people understand how they can exclude gain under 1202 or defer gain under the Opportunity Zone rules of 1400Z-2.
00;44;05;23 - 00;44;09;02
Speaker 1
One question I’ll ask, because it may be relatively straightforward, but
00;44;09;02 - 00;44;11;14
Speaker 1
I guess I’ll see if you get in enough.
00;44;11;14 - 00;44;13;15
Speaker 1
But I’ve had a number of people ask me about,
00;44;13;15 - 00;44;17;07
Speaker 1
obviously, like you said, we’re going to have this new permanent element of the QOZ,
00;44;17;19 - 00;44;22;25
Speaker 1
but we had our first iteration of it and 26 is coming up next year,
00;44;22;27 - 00;44;24;07
Speaker 1
last time I checked the calendar,
00;44;24;07 - 00;44;29;16
Speaker 1
no changes there to say that your initial gain deferral gets picked up.
00;44;29;16 - 00;44;31;07
Speaker 2
That’s what everybody was hoping for.
00;44;31;07 - 00;44;40;17
Speaker 2
And when I say everybody, people who invested initially in Opportunity Zones, that deferred gain, that clock has been ticking down to December 31st, 2026
00;44;40;17 - 00;44;47;12
Speaker 2
for a number of years now and everybody was hoping that can would get kicked down the road. But even with all those changes being made,
00;44;47;12 - 00;44;52;13
Speaker 2
nothing is delaying that recognition of that for deferred gain beyond
00;44;52;13 - 00;45;04;02
Speaker 2
12/31/2026 and so that first cycle is going to run its course as it was planned, meaning the deferred gain is going to come due 2026, and then you can start selling after a 10-year holding period
00;45;04;02 - 00;45;08;20
Speaker 2
and excluding the gain, none of those laws changed as much as people wanted them to,
00;45;08;20 - 00;45;15;25
Speaker 2
particularly as it related to that deferred gain. But instead, they’re just going to start recycling every 10 years, new Opportunity Zone
00;45;15;25 - 00;45;22;01
Speaker 2
programs, new designated Opportunity Zones and this ability to just keep deferring gain. But yeah, to your point,
00;45;22;01 - 00;45;25;05
Speaker 2
the relief did not come for 2026.
00;45;25;05 - 00;45;25;14
Speaker 2
And,
00;45;25;14 - 00;45;27;20
Speaker 2
a lot of investors were hoping it would.
00;45;27;23 - 00;45;31;17
Speaker 1
Fair enough. Dianne, what are you focus on? What’s
00;45;31;17 - 00;45;34;13
Speaker 1
catching your eye and takeaways here?
00;45;34;15 - 00;45;58;08
Speaker 3
While Tony is looking into deferring gain and Opportunity Zones and all this, I’m just looking at, do you want to accelerate any of your itemized deductions? Are there things you can spend money on now, generating an itemized deduction that’s going to have more value to you this year than it will next year or the year after? And same with charitable contributions.
00;45;58;10 - 00;46;15;07
Speaker 3
Are you planning that big contribution to that favorite university next year? Well, depending on your cash flow, you may want to consider it this year. We’ve got a lot of people that like to do tiered gifts over a series of years. Well, now’s the time to
00;46;15;07 - 00;46;26;05
Speaker 3
re-examine that and see the value of that tiered gift, the value of having that cash on hand for investment for the multiple years vs. the little bit of loss of deduction.
00;46;26;05 - 00;46;29;07
Speaker 3
Is it worth accelerating it into 25. So
00;46;29;07 - 00;46;39;29
Speaker 3
25, we’re going to see some money moved around and some maybe big expenses, large contributions possibly that would have been planned for 26 or 27.
00;46;39;29 - 00;46;40;14
Speaker 1
That’s right.
00;46;40;14 - 00;46;41;15
Speaker 1
Timing is huge.
00;46;41;15 - 00;46;43;29
Speaker 1
And then if you think about it, maybe even in light of this,
00;46;43;29 - 00;46;45;25
Speaker 1
you talk about the QOZ component, right?
00;46;45;25 - 00;46;51;24
Speaker 1
If you have a gain that you’re pulling in next year, your floor, it’s a modified AGI calculation,
00;46;51;24 - 00;46;53;23
Speaker 1
0.5% of that, I guess on your charitables.
00;46;53;23 - 00;46;54;07
Speaker 1
So
00;46;54;07 - 00;46;55;10
Speaker 1
all things being equal, if
00;46;55;10 - 00;46;57;17
Speaker 1
you’re going to have a bigger gain year next year,
00;46;57;17 - 00;47;02;03
Speaker 1
and you don’t face the 237ths limitation this year.
00;47;02;03 - 00;47;02;18
Speaker 1
Yeah.
00;47;02;18 - 00;47;06;18
Speaker 1
That’s where a lot of the planning is going to be, right?
00;47;06;20 - 00;47;08;05
Speaker 3
Yes, I agree.
00;47;08;05 - 00;47;12;09
Speaker 1
I think it’s going to be watching, particularly when you have
00;47;12;09 - 00;47;14;05
Speaker 1
an ability to control or
00;47;14;05 - 00;47;15;20
Speaker 1
you’re looking out into the future,
00;47;15;20 - 00;47;16;08
Speaker 1
say,
00;47;16;08 - 00;47;18;29
Speaker 1
you’re a private equity investor and
00;47;18;29 - 00;47;20;26
Speaker 1
you think there’s going to be years that
00;47;20;26 - 00;47;25;10
Speaker 1
there’s an exit that’s planned and whatnot, but then maybe in the off years, income’s lower.
00;47;25;23 - 00;47;33;04
Speaker 1
There’s going to be some planning around tax bracket management. That was particularly big coming out of the Tcja. It’s perhaps always been
00;47;33;04 - 00;47;36;03
Speaker 1
a particular focus, but just even looking at
00;47;36;03 - 00;47;40;20
Speaker 1
the phase out of your $40,000 state and local tax cap down to the 10,
00;47;40;20 - 00;47;41;11
Speaker 3
between the $500
00;47;41;11 - 00;47;42;06
Speaker 1
and $600,000.
00;47;42;07 - 00;47;42;21
Speaker 3
Yeah,
00;47;42;21 - 00;47;51;25
Speaker 1
exactly. So managing your taxable income or your adjusted gross income or whatever threshold it is, managing charitable contributions and carryovers,
00;47;51;25 - 00;47;54;01
Speaker 1
itemized, it’s a timing thing.
00;47;54;01 - 00;47;57;03
Speaker 1
The name of the game in taxes, we’re always looking at how do we
00;47;57;03 - 00;47;59;22
Speaker 1
pay a lower rate where we can. But it’s also
00;47;59;22 - 00;48;05;19
Speaker 1
how do we defer tax where we can, but also sometimes accelerating to be able to get a better benefit makes sense.
00;48;05;19 - 00;48;08;03
Speaker 1
So there’s no one-size-fits-all and
00;48;08;03 - 00;48;16;27
Speaker 1
that’s where the real work is going to come in from my perspective is looking at those situations and looking across a family group or
00;48;16;27 - 00;48;23;00
Speaker 1
a group of maybe I’m doing some estate planning and I’ve got non-grantor trusts in the mix and things like that.
00;48;23;03 - 00;48;24;19
Speaker 1
You go back to your QSBS, Tony.
00;48;24;19 - 00;48;28;15
Speaker 1
If QSBS is maybe going to be a lower bar to get to,
00;48;28;15 - 00;48;29;03
Speaker 1
even a half,
00;48;29;03 - 00;48;30;19
Speaker 1
50% exclusion,
00;48;30;19 - 00;48;34;16
Speaker 1
I mean, I can maybe stack it, if you will, with certain types of trust planning,
00;48;34;16 - 00;48;38;05
Speaker 1
while maybe also enhancing a state and local tax deduction.
00;48;38;06 - 00;48;40;12
Speaker 1
There’s a lot of layers here that you
00;48;40;12 - 00;48;41;20
Speaker 1
have to work through
00;48;41;20 - 00;48;42;25
Speaker 1
in doing the math.
00;48;42;25 - 00;48;43;09
Speaker 1
So
00;48;43;09 - 00;48;43;14
Speaker 1
yeah,
00;48;43;14 - 00;48;44;02
Speaker 1
it’s going to be
00;48;44;02 - 00;48;45;17
Speaker 1
crunching some numbers Dianne.
00;48;45;20 - 00;48;47;25
Speaker 3
No, back of the envelope numbers, though,
00;48;47;25 - 00;48;49;03
Speaker 3
crunching numbers.
00;48;49;03 - 00;48;55;04
Speaker 1
Crunching numbers. That’s right, that’s right. And the trick is to like and now, this is always the deal is,
00;48;55;04 - 00;48;57;29
Speaker 1
if you’re a tax professional, right, a lot of times we’ll use
00;48;57;29 - 00;48;59;20
Speaker 1
planning software and whatever else. And
00;48;59;20 - 00;49;03;28
Speaker 1
I don’t know when, but I can tell you they’re certainly not updated yet
00;49;03;28 - 00;49;04;22
Speaker 1
to say so.
00;49;04;22 - 00;49;08;01
Speaker 1
Like, you can’t just look out in planning software. It’s definitely,
00;49;08;09 - 00;49;10;29
Speaker 1
a true crunching of the numbers exercise, I guess,
00;49;10;29 - 00;49;11;24
Speaker 1
to that end.
00;49;11;24 - 00;49;13;15
Speaker 1
Tony, maybe it’s too soon to know.
00;49;13;15 - 00;49;15;15
Speaker 1
Choice of entity. I got to ask you, because
00;49;15;15 - 00;49;16;01
Speaker 1
it’s interesting.
00;49;16;01 - 00;49;18;20
Speaker 1
You got QSBS maybe getting a little better.
00;49;18;20 - 00;49;21;06
Speaker 1
Like you said, you’re going to spend some time there.
00;49;21;06 - 00;49;23;09
Speaker 1
And we got permanent 199 cap A.
00;49;23;09 - 00;49;32;17
Speaker 1
Any initial observations? I’ll limit it to that for you to give you the out to say, hey, maybe we need some more time to digest and chew on that one, but–
00;49;32;21 - 00;49;33;02
Speaker 2
yeah,
00;49;33;02 - 00;49;35;28
Speaker 2
the pendulum swung a couple different directions throughout this process.
00;49;35;28 - 00;49;39;28
Speaker 2
When 199 cap A was going to be increased to 23%,
00;49;39;28 - 00;49;44;29
Speaker 2
that swings the pendulum back in favor of remaining as a pass-through entity.
00;49;44;29 - 00;49;49;08
Speaker 2
But when you end up staying at 20%, even though it’s permanent now,
00;49;49;08 - 00;49;56;17
Speaker 2
when you start talking about coupling a 21% corporate rate with these new enhanced QSBS benefits,
00;49;56;17 - 00;50;02;13
Speaker 2
that’s a powerful one-two punch and powerful one-two incentive to maybe operate in corporate form
00;50;02;13 - 00;50;07;19
Speaker 2
to benefit from that low rate on your operating income and then the potential for
00;50;07;19 - 00;50;09;19
Speaker 2
completely tax-free gain upon exit.
00;50;09;19 - 00;50;14;18
Speaker 2
And so I don’t know that you’re going to see a big shift in either direction from what happened here.
00;50;14;18 - 00;50;15;07
Speaker 2
But,
00;50;15;07 - 00;50;25;25
Speaker 2
it’s all about the subtleties anyway, when you’re thinking about choice of entities specifically S vs. C, but it’s not like we saw changes to the corporate rate or the dividend rate and the net investment income tax rate
00;50;25;25 - 00;50;26;04
Speaker 2
that could
00;50;26;04 - 00;50;28;06
Speaker 2
move the needle. But yeah,
00;50;28;06 - 00;50;33;05
Speaker 2
keeping that 199 cap A at 20, making it permanent so that at least we know that piece of it.
00;50;33;05 - 00;50;42;21
Speaker 2
And then out of nowhere, seeing these enhancements to the QSBS rules, I would think the net effect of all of those is maybe a slight
00;50;42;21 - 00;50;45;25
Speaker 2
tipping of that pendulum back towards
00;50;45;25 - 00;50;47;01
Speaker 2
corporate life, but–
00;50;47;01 - 00;50;48;03
Speaker 2
C corporation, I should say.
00;50;48;03 - 00;50;48;21
Speaker 2
But,
00;50;48;21 - 00;50;50;24
Speaker 2
it’s all going to be fact specific, but,
00;50;50;24 - 00;50;51;23
Speaker 2
that’s where,
00;50;51;23 - 00;50;55;20
Speaker 2
now the rubber — meets the road and we start doing our analysis.
00;50;55;23 - 00;51;06;00
Speaker 1
That’s right, that’s right. So, Dianne, what closing thoughts or overall comments would you leave our listeners with here today on where we are with the bill?
00;51;06;00 - 00;51;30;29
Speaker 3
Where we are with the bill is it was a little bit anticlimactic. That’s right. We had so much moving with the House version and the Senate version and oh, this is going to be exciting and PTET and the limits and then at the end, it was okay, at least in my field. I know in Tony’s world, it’s a little bit more exciting with the QSBS and the Opportunity Zones,
00;51;30;29 - 00;51;38;11
Speaker 3
but in my world, it’s like, okay, we’ve got some modest movements. There are lots of layers to consider. There are
00;51;38;11 - 00;51;41;18
Speaker 3
again, this is not the time for back of the envelope. This is the time to
00;51;41;18 - 00;51;50;18
Speaker 3
sit down and look at some multiyear planning and how this can work for you. But I’m not going to say I was disappointed because
00;51;50;18 - 00;51;54;07
Speaker 3
a little bit status quo is good for all of us.
00;51;54;10 - 00;52;03;11
Speaker 3
I’m glad we’re not in Tcja world where the entire code has been blown up and we’re relearning it, but a little bit anticlimactic.
00;52;03;18 - 00;52;05;06
Speaker 1
I would agree with you, Tony.
00;52;05;06 - 00;52;09;14
Speaker 1
What do you think? Would you agree with that? Anything you’d add to that? Yeah.
00;52;09;15 - 00;52;21;07
Speaker 2
Dianne absolutely nailed it. Like, yes, this is meaningful legislation. Absolutely. But it’s that learning process that we don’t have to necessarily endure the way we did back in early 2018.
00;52;21;07 - 00;52;21;13
Speaker 2
Like,
00;52;21;13 - 00;52;29;08
Speaker 2
199 cap A was a mystery, 163(j) even more so, 461(l), these things were all brand new. We had to wait
00;52;29;08 - 00;52;31;17
Speaker 2
with bated breath for regulations to figure out
00;52;31;17 - 00;52;33;21
Speaker 2
how to deploy these provisions.
00;52;33;21 - 00;52;34;27
Speaker 2
Here it is.
00;52;34;27 - 00;52;38;00
Speaker 2
Dianne used the term status quo and for a lot of these provisions, it’s
00;52;38;00 - 00;52;42;27
Speaker 2
what it is. We just made things permanent. And don’t get me wrong, we pointed out some changes today.
00;52;42;27 - 00;52;48;14
Speaker 2
But yeah, it’s just — there’s not going to be that learning curve there was in 2018 where
00;52;48;14 - 00;52;52;16
Speaker 2
an entire industry is struggling to figure out how to interpret a provision.
00;52;52;16 - 00;52;53;20
Speaker 2
That is something that
00;52;53;20 - 00;52;58;12
Speaker 2
as an industry, like Dianne said, sometimes the status quo is just right.
00;52;58;12 - 00;53;08;12
Speaker 1
Yeah. Well, thank you both. I seriously can’t think of two better people I’d rather talk about this stuff with. And I know, again, we go back and forth and trade messages and been following it and tracking it along the way, but
00;53;08;12 - 00;53;10;02
Speaker 1
I just want to thank you both,
00;53;10;02 - 00;53;10;20
Speaker 1
for
00;53;10;20 - 00;53;15;01
Speaker 1
just sharing thoughts and again, helping to navigate through this because it’s been
00;53;15;01 - 00;53;16;18
Speaker 1
certainly, some ups and downs and
00;53;16;18 - 00;53;19;11
Speaker 1
some additions and subtractions and whatever
00;53;19;11 - 00;53;20;01
Speaker 1
cliche
00;53;20;01 - 00;53;22;09
Speaker 1
idioms we can throw in here.
00;53;22;12 - 00;53;22;25
Speaker 1
But,
00;53;22;25 - 00;53;23;23
Speaker 1
I
00;53;23;23 - 00;53;25;03
Speaker 1
do appreciate the both of you.
00;53;25;17 - 00;53;32;21
Speaker 3
I was happy to do this. It was fun. Thanks, Damien. I’m going to start stalking all of your podcasts and just dropping in on them.
00;53;32;23 - 00;53;35;12
Speaker 1
Fair enough. You’re welcome any time. Well, we’ll
00;53;35;12 - 00;53;36;19
Speaker 1
just give you an honorary
00;53;36;28 - 00;53;39;00
Speaker 1
invite or something. I don’t know.
00;53;39;03 - 00;53;41;06
Speaker 2
It’s always fun, Damien. And yes, it was
00;53;41;06 - 00;53;44;13
Speaker 2
even more fun to have Dianne here today, so let’s do it again.
00;53;44;16 - 00;53;45;13
Speaker 1
You got it.
00;53;48;12 - 00;53;59;17
Speaker 1
Thanks again for joining us for another episode of Elements of Private Tax, where private tax gets practical, one element at a time. We want to know what you think of the podcast and help with any questions you might have.
00;53;59;19 - 00;54;18;21
Speaker 1
Drop me an email at damien.martin@ey.com and don’t forget to leave us a rating and review. For more insights on the topics we covered today, check out EY.com, where you’ll find articles and webcasts that delve deeper into many of the provisions of the bill we discussed today, as well as those that we didn’t have time for due to the vast scope of the bill.
00;54;18;24 - 00;54;38;18
Speaker 1
As a reminder, this podcast is intended for informational and educational purposes only. It’s not tax, legal or financial advice. Always consult with your own tax advisor, which of course, we’re happy to become if we don’t currently work with you. Well, that’s going to do it for us today on Elements of Private Tax. In the immortal words of Ron Burgundy, you stay classy,
00;54;38;18 - 00;54;41;04
Speaker 1
Private Tax. I’m Damien Martin.