By Washington Post

President Obama on Thursday signed into law a measure that repeals the unpopular 1099 tax-reporting provision of the national health-care law.

The move marked the first successful effort by Congress to repeal a portion of Obama’s signature health-care legislation.

The Senate earlier this month voted 87-to-12 to repeal the 1099 provision. The House passed the measure in March on a bipartisan 314-to-112 vote.

The White House released a statement announcing the Obama had signed the measure, which it said “repeals the expansion in the Affordable Care Act of requirements for businesses to report information to the Internal Revenue Service on payments for goods of $600 or more annually to other businesses and increases the amount of overpayment subject to repayment of premium assistance tax credits for health insurance coverage purchases through the Exchanges established under the Affordable Care Act.”

Obama’s signing of the legislation into law marks the end of a nearly eight-month-long effort by lawmakers to do away with the 1099 tax-reporting provision. Sen. Mike Johanns (R-Neb.) had led the effort in the Senate, but each time repeal seemed close, the parties reached an impasse over how to pay for the repeal, which would result in the loss of an estimated $22 billion over the next decade.

The law signed by Obama on Thursday would pay for repeal by forcing greater repayment of health insurance subsidies for families whose income unexpectedly exceeds certain thresholds.

By NAPEO

Thirty-three states (including the Virgin Islands) have borrowed more than $48 billion from the Federal Unemployment Account, according to U.S. Department of Labor data released this week. In states with loan balances on January 1 of two consecutive years that have not repaid them by November 10 of the second year, employers are at risk of losing a portion of their state FUTA tax credits for that year. The credit is reduced by 0.30 percent for each year the loan remains outstanding beyond the second year of the loan. Twenty-four states will experience a FUTA tax credit reduction, assuming each has a loan balance on November 10, 2011.

by Joanne Deschenaux, J.D., SHRM senior legal editor

Speaking before a session of the Society for Human Resource Management’s Employment Law & Legislative Conference March 14, 2011, an unemployment insurance (UI) expert presented a bleak picture of UI costs across the country. The following sobering facts were revealed by Douglas Holmes, the president of UWC, a nationwide association that represents the interests of the business community on national unemployment insurance and workers’ compensation public policy issues:

1. State unemployment taxes increased as a percent of total wages on average by 34 percent from 2009 to 2010 and are expected to increase even more for 2011 and 2012.
2. Thirty-two states have outstanding federal loans of $43.6 billion. The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) projects a peak in 2013 of up to 40 states and $65.2 billion.
3. Interest on loans is charged at the rate of just over 4 percent for 2011. Under federal law, the interest may not be repaid from the state UI taxes, so approximately $1.7 billion will have to be paid from other sources. Employers in 19 states will pay a special assessment to cover this cost (Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Indiana, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Wisconsin).
4. The first interest payment from states is due Sept. 30, 2011. Interest continues as long as loans are outstanding.
5. Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA) increases in borrowing states have begun in Michigan, Indiana and South Carolina, and are projected in 24 states for 2011, costing more than $2 billion in additional FUTA taxes.
6. Spending on unemployment compensation is at an all-time high, jumping from approximately $31 billion in 2008 to $120 billion in 2009 and $160 billion in 2010.

Impact on HR

Going beyond the numbers, what does this mean for HR? “Congress will focus on this only when they have to,” Holmes said, noting that state and federal UI taxes will continue to rise, which will increase the cost of hiring. In addition, the increased duration of unemployment compensation will continue to be a disincentive to individuals deciding whether to actively seek and accept work available in the labor market, he noted.

Ronald Adler, the president of Laurdan Associates, a consulting firm in Potomac, Md., stressed that HR professionals “need to understand how much UI is costing their individual companies.” In addition to an increase in the cost of hiring, UI-related risks include increased administrative costs and reduced profitability, he said. In addition, UI activity may trigger an audit by the state UI agency as well as by federal agencies, including the Department of Labor, Internal Revenue Service or Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

So what can HR do?

Adler noted that the first step for HR should be to review and verify tax rate notices. Next, ensure that your classifications of employees and independent contractors are correct and ensure that you have properly reported wages—the correct amounts to the correct states, he added.

Next, Adler recommended that HR take steps to protect the company’s experience rating, which impacts the state taxes it must pay. In order to do this, HR professionals should make sure that all UI claims forms are timely and correctly completed. All incorrect determinations and decisions should be appealed. He further recommended that HR attend UI hearings. In addition, he said, HR should notify the state UI agency of rehires and of refusals of job offers.
HR professionals should also look at the broader picture, Adler suggested, and assess hiring procedures and performance management appraisals. Increased effectiveness in performing these tasks may reduce UI claims, he noted. In addition, HR should ensure proper and effective documentation of employment actions and review disciplinary and termination procedures.

And of utmost importance is the training of supervisors and managers, Adler emphasized.
Holmes made the following additional suggestions for HR professionals concerned with the rising costs of providing UI benefits:

• Work with SHRM and business advocacy groups to explain the impact of increasing payroll taxes on decisions to hire.
• Explain the practical impact of individuals staying on unemployment compensation for long periods—loss of job skills; disincentive to accept jobs that are open while claiming unemployment compensation.
• Manage UI claims costs by paying attention to benefit charges, refusals of work, overpayment and fraud.
• Work with state workforce agencies to identify opportunities for unemployed workers for on-the-job training, internships and customized training that may serve some of your needs while reducing unemployment claims.
• State and federal unemployment taxes will continue to increase over the next three years and remain at higher rates for at least 10 years on average, Holmes predicted, so this is not a problem that is going to ease anytime soon.

For more information, visit www.shrm.org

The NCAA tournament is just around the corner and offices are abuzz with friendly banter and cries of team loyalty. Along with plenty of excitement and new found bragging rights among fellow colleagues, March Madness brings forth a torrid fear of lost productivity in the workplace. Though accurate numbers are incredibly difficult to pinpoint in such instances, outplacement firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas, estimated in a 2008 press release that lost productivity during the tournament could cost businesses an estimated 1.7 billion every year. While these numbers are seen only as an estimate and in some opinions as a heavily aggrandized estimate, it would be foolish to think that there is not a significant impact on time and productivity for the duration of the tournament.

While an employer’s first reaction may be to try and limit March Madness related activities in the workplace, there are definitely a few things to consider before taking any action against tournament involvement. First, denial of participation could be seen by employees as overbearing and in opposition to a fun work environment. Employee morale is crucial for productivity, and would therefore seem counter intuitive for employers hoping to retain a high level of productivity to discourage participation in an activity considered somewhat of a sports holiday. Instead of discouraging involvement and risking a discontented office, consider using March Madness to your advantage. There are many different ways an employer or manager could use the NCAA tournament as a way to improve employee morale and create a stronger sense of camaraderie throughout the workplace:

1. Create an online, office-wide bracket.
Creating a bracket on a website such as ESPN.com or Yahoo! Sports would eliminate the need to create, hand out and fill in paper brackets. Encourage people to participate only if they would like, and if the employees would like to have a buy-in for competitive purposes, we suggest the money go towards a charity or non-profit organization of the winner’s choice.

2. Offer small, fun and/or personalized prizes for top placers.
An already stated prize would not only encourage friendly competition and participation, it would also help to discourage against illegal gambling in the workplace. Some example of appropriate prizes may include gift certificates, a favorite team souvenir, or perhaps a meal on a supervisor’s tab.

3. Offer flexible hours and dress code allowances when appropriate.
A possible solution to the distraction of an early evening game could be a flexible work week. Also, since Fridays are often considered a more causal day in the workplace, employees could be encouraged to wear a tie, jersey or even socks to show where their hopes and loyalties lay within the tournament.

4. Encourage watching the tournament as a group.
Many workplaces allot for short breaks throughout the day. Encourage employees to gather to the TV in the break room (or at single designated computer as to not take up too much bandwidth) during those times. One could even promote a potluck lunch, catering or group gatherings after work to watch the game together.

5. Designate times to stay involved and keep the competition alive.
A bi-weekly e-mail or short announcement at the end of an informal meeting discussing up-to-date results would help to discourage employees from constantly tracking brackets while at work and would also help the manager or supervisor to stay involved.

While this list is not at all exhaustive, these are a few simple ways to take what is consistently seen as a drag on productivity and turn it into a way to promote a healthier and more enjoyable work environment. For more information or any questions, contact Staff One at 1-800-771-7823 or visit www.staffone.com.

Founded in 1988, Staff One is a leading Human Resources Outsourcing firm with an ESAC accredited and bonded PEO service offering. Staff One operates as a full-service human resources department and delivers a comprehensive range of solutions that provides our clients with a level of support and value previously only available at much larger companies. By aggregating the buying power of hundreds of firms, we provide premium benefits, risk management, compliance management, payroll outsourcing, tax administration and strategic HR services to our customers, so they can focus on growing their core business.

From IRS

WASHINGTON ― The Internal Revenue Service today released instructions to help employers implement the 2011 cut in payroll taxes, along with new income-tax withholding tables that employers will use during 2011.

Millions of workers will see their take-home pay rise during 2011 because the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010 provides a two percentage point payroll tax cut for employees, reducing their Social Security tax withholding rate from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent of wages paid. This reduced Social Security withholding will have no effect on the employee’s future Social Security benefits.

The new law also maintains the income-tax rates that have been in effect in recent years.

Employers should start using the new withholding tables and reducing the amount of Social Security tax withheld as soon as possible in 2011 but not later than Jan. 31, 2011. Notice 1036, released today, contains the percentage method income tax withholding tables, the lower Social Security withholding rate, and related information that most employers need to implement these changes. Publication 15, (Circular E), Employer’s Tax Guide, containing the extensive wage bracket tables that some employers use, will be available on IRS.gov in a few days.

The IRS recognizes that the late enactment of these changes makes it difficult for many employers to quickly update their withholding systems. For that reason, the agency asks employers to adjust their payroll systems as soon as possible, but not later than Jan. 31, 2011.

For any Social Security tax over withheld during January, employers should make an offsetting adjustment in workers’ pay as soon as possible but not later than March 31, 2011.

Employers and payroll companies will handle the withholding changes, so workers typically won’t need to take any additional action, such as filling out a new W-4 withholding form.

As always, however, the IRS urges workers to review their withholding every year and, if necessary, fill out a new W-4 and give it to their employer. For example, individuals and couples with multiple jobs, people who are having children, getting married, getting divorced or buying a home, and those who typically wind up with a balance due or large refund at the end of the year may want to consider submitting revised W-4 forms. Publication 919, How Do I Adjust My Tax Withholding?, provides more information to workers on making changes to their tax withholding.

The IRS has released frequently asked questions (FAQs) addressing the small business health care tax credit provision under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). The questions and answers provide information on the credit as it applies for 2010-2013, including information on transition relief for 2010. An enhanced version of the credit will be effective beginning in 2014.

Employer-paid premiums in 2010. Only premiums paid by the employer under an arrangement meeting certain requirements (a “qualifying arrangement”) are counted in calculating the credit. Under a qualifying arrangement, the employer pays premiums for each employee enrolled in health care coverage offered by the employer in an amount equal to a uniform percentage (not less than 50 percent) of the premium cost of the coverage.

For years prior to 2014, only premiums paid to a health insurance issuer, such as an insurance company or HMO, for health care coverage are counted for purposes of the credit. Premiums for health care coverage that covers a wide variety of conditions, such as a major medical plan, are counted and premiums for certain coverage that is more limited in scope, such as limited scope dental or vision coverage, are also counted.

The FAQs clarify that premiums, as described above, that were paid by the employer in 2010, but before the new health reform legislation was enacted, can be counted in calculating the credit.

Transition relief for tax years beginning in 2010. For tax years beginning in 2010, the following transition relief applies with respect to the requirements for a qualifying arrangement:

An employer that pays at least 50% of the premium for each employee enrolled in coverage offered to employees by the employer is deemed to satisfy the qualifying arrangement requirement even though the employer does not pay a uniform percentage of the premium for each such employee. Accordingly, if the employer otherwise satisfies the requirements for the credit described above, it will qualify for the credit even though the percentage of the premium it pays is not uniform for all such employees.

The requirement that the employer pay at least 50% of the premium for an employee applies to the premium for single (employee-only) coverage for the employee. Therefore, if the employee is receiving single coverage, the employer satisfies the 50% requirement with respect to the employee if it pays at least 50% of the premium for that coverage for each employee receiving single coverage.

If the employee is receiving coverage that is more expensive than single coverage, such as family or self plus- one coverage, the employer satisfies the 50% requirement with respect to the employee if the employer pays an amount of the premium for such coverage that is no less than 50% of the premium for single coverage for that employee, even if it is less than 50% of the premium for the coverage the employee is actually receiving.

For more information, visit www.irs.gov/newsroom

by Stephen Miller from shrm.org

The Bush-era tax cuts are set to expire at the close of 2010. While Congress could pass a partial or full extension before year-end 2010, U.S. employers must adjust their payroll deduction systems for 2011 well before the end of 2010. That could mean setting their payroll systems to anticipate no extension; then if Congress acts, they would need to readjust these systems again in 2011.

Setting payroll systems to reflect the higher tax rates that were in effect a decade ago will mean more money being withheld from workers’ paychecks, according to CCH, a provider of employment and payroll law information and software. And that will present a communications challenge for employers.

Change, and Change Again

“The tax cuts—now known as the ‘Bush tax cuts’—were signed on June 7, 2001,” noted John W. Strzelecki, senior payroll analyst at CCH, which is part of Wolters Kluwer Law & Business. “The IRS then issued new withholding tables, effective July 1, 2001, that incorporated the new tax cuts. In addition, the new tables took into account the fact that too much money was taken from paychecks that were issued in the first half of the year.”

Strzelecki foresees a similar pattern this time, with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) issuing tax withholding tables for 2011 in November 2010 and subsequently issuing revised tables if Congress extends the Bush-era tax rates. “If the tax cuts are passed and signed, the IRS will revise the withholding tables with an effective date that allows just enough time for the payroll industry to implement the changes, just as in June 2001,” Strzelecki said. “The tables will take into account the fact that too much money was withheld from the paychecks that were issued prior to the tax cuts, also just like in 2001,” he explained.

“What it all boils down to is workers will see less take-home pay beginning in 2011 and more take-home pay later in the year, just as we saw in 2001,” said Strzelecki.

For employers, this highlights the importance of keeping employees informed of why their tax withholding will be higher, at least initially—even if Congress should act before the end of 2010.

More Information at shrm.org article

In their quest to hire reliable and trustworthy employees for open positions, many employers have turned to credit reporting agencies for applicant background information. Although such information may be readily available, obtaining it could lead to possible liability if the appropriate policies and procedures are not in place.

Discrimination Claims
Under Title VII, employer practices – such as basing hiring and other employment decisions on credit history information – that weigh more heavily on individuals within protected categories could lead to discrimination claims. For instance, if an employer’s use of credit reports has the effect of excluding women or minorities from certain positions, that practice could lead to liability.

In addition, a number of states have enacted or are considering enacting laws that explicitly prohibit discrimination on the basis of credit histories. For instance, Illinois’ newly enacted Employee Credit Privacy Act, which goes into effect on January 1, 2011, prohibits employers from inquiring about an applicant’s or employee’s credit history and from ordering or otherwise obtaining an applicant’s or employee’s credit history or credit report from a consumer reporting agency. Despite the potentially broad reach of Illinois’ new Act, there are several exceptions including:

• Situations where an employer can show that a satisfactory credit history is a “bona fide occupational requirement” for a position, which is further defined in the statute;
• Employers who are banks, savings and loans, or certain other financial institutions; insurance or surety businesses; state law enforcement or investigative units; state or local government agencies that otherwise require use of the employee’s or applicant’s credit history or credit report; and entities that are defined as debt collectors under federal or state statute; and
• Background investigations that do not include a credit history or report as permitted under the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

Employers that violate the Illinois Act could face damages, injunctive relief, and liability for attorneys’ fees and costs and could also face liability for any retaliatory conduct under the Act.

Along the same lines, legislation has been introduced in, among other states, Michigan and Ohio as well. In Michigan, House Bill 4528, also known as the Job Applicant Credit Privacy Act, would prohibit an employer from failing or refusing either to hire or recruit an individual because of the individual’s credit history and from inquiring about a job applicant’s or potential job applicant’s credit history. As with the Illinois Act, certain exceptions would apply for individuals who hold positions with identified types of companies including, for instance, banks or other financial institutions.

In Ohio, House Bill 340, which was introduced on October 28, 2009, would make it an unlawful discriminatory practice for an employer to use a person’s credit rating or score or consumer credit history as a factor in making decisions regarding that person’s employment. House Bill 340would allow a person to file a charge with the Ohio Civil Rights Commission and would provide similar penalties for violations.

As these examples show, a blanket policy of requiring credit reports for all employees or applicants could lead to possible discrimination claims under state or federal law or both.

The Federal Fair Credit Reporting Act
Moreover, even when employers are permitted to obtain applicant or employee credit reports, liability can still attach if the detailed procedures set forth in the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) are not followed. Specifically, the FCRA requires employers to inform applicants that a credit check will be performed and to obtain the applicants’ written permission in a stand-alone document that is not part of the employment application.

In addition, if an employer decides to take an adverse employment action against an employee or applicant based on the credit check, the employer must first give that individual a “pre-adverse action disclosure” that consists of a copy of the credit report and a written summary of rights under the FCRA before taking the adverse action. Presumably, this requirement is intended to allow an employee or applicant an opportunity to attempt to correct any inaccuracies on the report. Once the adverse action has been taken, the employer must provide the applicant or employee with an “adverse action notice.” This notice must alert the recipient that the employer, not the credit reporting agency, made the adverse decision; inform the recipient that he or she has a right to a free copy of the report; and provide the name, address and phone number of the agency that provided the credit report so that the recipient can dispute any inaccurate information.

Employers that fail to comply with the FCRA may face liability for actual damages, attorneys’ fees, costs and punitive damages. Criminal penalties are also possible for any employer that obtains a credit report under false pretenses.

Minimizing The Risks
Some of the ways you can minimize the risks of obtaining employee or applicant credit reports are by:

• Determining whether state laws govern your use of applicant/employee credit reports;
• Evaluating whether the benefits of obtaining credit reports for various positions outweigh the risks of doing so;
• Developing appropriate policies and procedures to govern procurement of credit reports; and
• Ensuring compliance.

by BHZ

At the first signs of a southbound economy, some companies rush into panic mode:; they slash the staff and hope for the best. Certainly, labor is the biggest expense for most businesses. That’s why many managers believe there is no faster, more efficient way to improve the bottom line than by cutting staff.

But when you add up some of the costs of layoffs, such as severance payments, continued healthcare costs for some former employees, and higher unemployment charges, you may realize you are defeating your purpose. And that’s only part of the picture. Since layoffs create uncertainty, they often prompt a drop in productivity, a decline in quality, a loss of talent as remaining staff members start looking for jobs elsewhere and increased costs to train remaining employees to take up the slack.

That’s just the short term. Once the economy picks up steam, you’ll have to spend money recruiting and training a new workforce. You might be understaffed and unable to keep up with new demand – another strain on profitability.

There are stories of companies during the Great Depression that had employees wash windows over and over again rather than lay them off. The end result: a fiercely loyal and trained staff ready to jump into action as the economy turned slowly up.

Take a clue from those companies and adopt a contrarian stance when possible. Here are eight strategies to help you adapt to changing economic circumstances with layoffs as a last result. In the end, your company will be more efficient and better prepared to tackle the competition when the economy re-engages.

Strategy #1: Get a playbook – Like a football team, you need a series of defensive plays as the game progresses quarter to quarter. Your company playbook – a combination of a business plan and strategic vision – helps you stay on track during hard times. And expect your employees to achieve the goals in the plan.

Strategy #2: Involve staff - Keep employees appraised of the challenges your company faces. Let them know layoffs are a last resort but you need their help to bring expenses into line. Set up cost-cutting teams and give them goals.

Strategy #3: Dump some perks - This can produce a host of cost cuts. Prime areas for trimming the fat are travel, executive seminars, rental cars, expense accounts and staff retreats.

Strategy #4: Opt for some rescheduling - Consider a four-day workweek, telecommuting, temporary furloughs, flextime and other means to cut payroll costs.

Strategy #5: Trim salaries - Reduce wages by, say, five percent across the board. Offer employees stock options that make up the difference and provide an incentive to work toward the company’s success. Ask senior executives to forgo annual bonuses. Review your sales commission policy for possible cuts.

Strategy #6: Streamline – Restructure your business to enhance performance. Get rid of any department, plan or operation that isn’t contributing to the company’s success. Look for duplicated efforts, obsolete production lines and non-core businesses that can be sold.

Strategy #7: Selectively downsize – Take advantage of attrition and early retirement possibilities. If layoffs are inevitable, consolidate back-office operations first and retain employees who have face-to-face contact with customers. Look to lay off employees who add little value or disrupt others’ performance.

Strategy #8: Beef up coaching – During a slowdown, your employees are likely to have more time for training than when your businesses is steaming full ahead. By adding training, you show employees that you’re committed and willing to invest in their careers. And they’ll be better prepared once the economy picks up steam.

Of course, there’s no way to know how long the economy will remain weak. But with some creative juggling, you can retain employees and give them a stronger determination to make the company succeed.

On September 27, 2010, President Obama signed the Small Business Lending Funding Act, referred to by its Tax title as the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 (the “Act”).  The Act includes a number of important tax provisions for individuals and businesses (small and large).  A number of important changes are summarized here:

• Extension of Successful SBA Recovery Loan Provisions: With funds provided in the bill, SBA will begin funding new Recovery loans within a few days of the President’s signature, starting with the more than 1,400 businesses that are waiting in the Recovery Loan Queue.  In total, the extension of these provisions provides the capacity to support $14 billion in loans to small businesses.
• A More Than Doubling of the Maximum Loan Size for The Largest SBA Programs:The bill also increases the maximum loan size for SBA loan programs, which in the coming weeks will allow more small businesses to access more credit to allow them to expand and create new jobs. The bill will permanently raise the maximum size for SBA’s two largest loan programs, increasing the maximum 7(a) and 504 loans from $2 million to $5 million, and the maximum 504 manufacturing related loan from $4 million to $5.5 million.  In addition, it will temporarily increase the maximum loan size for SBA Express loans from $350,000 to $1 million, providing greater access to working capital loans that small businesses use to purchase new inventory and take on their next order.
• A New $30 Billion Small Business Lending Fund:The bill would establish a new $30 billion Small Business Lending Fund which – by providing capital to small banks with incentives to increase small business lending – could support several multiples of that amount in new credit.
• An Initiative to Strengthen Innovative State Small Business Programs – Supporting Over $15 Billion in Lending:The bill will support at least $15 billion in small business lending through a new State Small Business Credit Initiative, strengthening state small business programs that leverage private-sector lenders to extend additional credit – many of which have been forced to cut back due to budget cuts.
• Eight New Small Business Tax Cuts – Effective Today, Providing Immediate Incentives to Invest:
  • Zero Taxes on Capital Gains from Key Small Business Investments:Under the Recovery Act, 75 percent of capital gains on key small business investments this year were excluded from taxes. The Small Business Jobs Act temporarily puts in place for the rest of 2010 a provision eliminating all capital gains taxes on these investments if held for five years. Over one million small businesses are eligible to receive investments this year that, if held for five years or longer, could be completely excluded from any capital gains taxation.
  • Extension and Expansion of Small Businesses’ Ability to Immediately Expense Capital Investments: The bill increases for 2010 and 2011 the amount of investments that businesses would be eligible to immediately write off to $500,000, while raising the level of investments at which the write-off phases out to $2 million. Prior to the passage of the bill, the expensing limit would have been $250,000 this year, and only $25,000 next year.
  • Extension of 50% Bonus Depreciation:The bill extends a Recovery Act provision for 50 percent “bonus depreciation” through 2010, providing 2 million businesses, large and small, with the ability to make new investments today by accelerating the rate at which they deduct capital expenditures.
  • A New Deduction of Health Insurance Costs for Self-Employed:The bill allows 2 million self-employed to get a deduction for the cost of health insurance for themselves and their family members in calculating their self-employment taxes. This provision is estimated to provide over $1.9 billion in tax cuts for these entrepreneurs.
  • Tax Relief and Simplification for Cell Phone Deductions:The bill changes rules so that the use of cell phones can be deducted without burdensome extra documentation for virtually every small business beginning on their taxes for this year.
  • An Increase in the Deduction for Entrepreneurs’ Start-Up Expenses:The bill temporarily increases the amount of start-up expenditures entrepreneurs can deduct from their taxes for this year from $5,000 to $10,000 (with a phase-out threshold of $60,000 in expenditures).
  • A Five-Year Carryback Of General Business Credits:The bill would allow certain small businesses to “carry back” their general business credits to offset five years of taxes, while also allowing these credits to offset the Alternative Minimum Tax.
  • Limitations on Penalties for Errors in Tax Reporting That Disproportionately Affect Small Business:The bill would change, beginning this year, the penalty for failing to report certain tax transactions from a fixed dollar amount to a percentage of the tax benefits from the transaction.

As described above, both businesses and individuals are affected by the Act.  More information on the Act can be found here