Discussion:As a CPA, can I recommend a business structure for a client?

From TaxAlmanac, A Free Online Resource for Tax Professionals
Note: You are using this website at your own risk, subject to our Disclaimer and Website Use and Contribution Terms.

From TaxAlmanac

Jump to: navigation, search

Discussion Forum Index --> Tax Questions --> As a CPA, can I recommend a business structure for a client?

Focus246 (talk|edits) said:

7 June 2007
I have been asked by clients - "What type of business should I form?" I can tell my clients about the various entities (sole proprietor, partnership, LLC, etc.), but I don't feel comfortable recommending a business structure. As I CPA, I should not do this, right? Is it best to recommend the clients talk to an attorney? Help!!!!

JR1 (talk|edits) said:

June 7, 2007
!! That's one of your most important jobs!! You're going to let an attorney pick? Of course, when the liability side of the issues come up, we defer to attorneys, but we alone understand the costs and benefits and alone have to live with the decision.

Focus246 (talk|edits) said:

7 June 2007
Ok. So it sounds like I need to develop a comfort level when it comes to suggesting the structure to choose. I can describe the structures and tell them about the various tax implications. Do you have any suggestions on increasing my comfort level? Or maybe I just need to have a bit more confidence.

JR1 (talk|edits) said:

June 7, 2007
Experience matters in this. I wonder...I just wrote a newsletter for my clients with some thoughts on entities. Let me paste it here, maybe it will help. Others can disagree, but I'm thinking entity choice is one of my stronger suits to play from...this is kinda long, hope it helps a bit.

Here's part 1 re: real estate holdings...Entity choice is probably the hottest on-going topic on a tax-pro board that I’m part of. Doing it well isn’t very exciting, but doing it wrong can be catastrophic. Figuring that some of you are normal people like those who write in for advice, recapping some of the issues here might be useful. Let me cover rental property quickly, and then move onto business. Rental has only recently gotten onto the entity radar screen for good reason. First, never ever ever under any circumstances of any kind do you want real estate inside a corp (unless it’s been there and we’re just waiting to get it back out). And since partnerships provided no legal protection, that topic was over—you owned rentals personally, no options. With the advent of the LLC in recent years, in most states, it makes sense to hold rental property in an LLC. Unless there are partners involved, it’s still just included in the personal tax filing as usual, so you get legal protection for low cost. With multiple LLC’s, in IL and a couple other states, there can be a parent LLC and sub LLC’s. The downside is that each must have its own checking account. After 2 or 3 rentals, no way anyone wants to keep that many checkbooks.

Now for business. This is a complex area and choosing wrong can haunt you and cost you big, for a really long time. Many websites now tout the LLC for everyone, but they’re creating ‘opportunities’ (read that as billings) for accountants and attorneys to straighten up the mess. There are three basic types of business: sole props, LLC’s, and corps. And there are two types of corps. When a one-person business is getting started, it’s almost always as a sole prop. I wave my pencil over the phone and *poof* you’re in business. Unless there are employees or sales taxes to collect, there’s nothing to register for, forms to fill out, filings to make or pay for. Many businesses remain in this mode forever, unless the earnings of the business make incorporating a good tax move. More and more often, just as with rental property going into an LLC for protection purposes, sole proprietors can and perhaps should be single-member LLC’s, which changes nothing for tax filings, but provides that extra layer of legal security. They’re still considered sole props for tax purposes. Simple.

As a business grows in profits, where the salary that the owner would take is less than the SS ceiling (currently 90k+) and there’s still profit after that salary, a lot of savings can be had by incorporating, specifically as an S corp. If you’re earning 70k per year, and a reasonable salary is 50k, then you’d save 20k * 15.3% in SS taxes each year, or over $3000. It probably costs $1000 per year to have the corp with added filing costs and fees, but you’re ahead of the game, and can take those savings and drop them into an IRA or SEP and get a deduction for that as well. That’s really using tax law in your favor. The higher the profit, or the lower the required salary, the better the results.

Additionally, S corps pay tax once, nearly all at the personal level. There are still some C corps around. While these are best used for large companies with many shareholders, they can be effective where a sole worker/shareholder has excessive medical costs, which can be deducted by the C corp. But there are pains and pitfalls in the C like nowhere else.

LLC’s are a new breed, still. Technically, IRS doesn’t recognize them, but defaults them as partnerships unless another choice is made. For reasons too complex to go into, an LLC should only be taxed as a partnership (or disregarded as a sole prop or Sch. E rental). LLC’s offer some flexibility that we can’t have in a corp structure with more than one owner. For example, if one owner brings the money, and the other will work the business, a corp structure can’t work without creating tax initially. So the LLC is the only choice. We can have different cash ownership, and split profits however we like. And some new techniques are giving the LLC the same opportunities to cut SS taxes as the S Corp, by creating two classes of partnership interest, an active interest and a limited interest. The limited interest is not subject to SE tax, while the active or general interest is. So we set the active interest at the level of a reasonable salary, and save the SS taxes on the limited interest. Some extra legal work is needed to make this bulletproof.

That’s the big pic. Where a partner comes to play, the conversation gets more complicated, and I touched on that a bit in the Sept 06 newsletter. But best to meet on that anyway.

BethAZ (talk|edits) said:

7 June 2007
As a CPA, I report the news. I don't make the news. The client makes the news.

I figure it's my job to explain options and give my opinion on what I think is the best choice for my client according to his or her goals. My opinion is why they pay me the big bucks.

Actually, unless we hold a gun to their heads (and I hardly ever do that), the client ultimately decides, and the client has to live with the decision. Like I said, we just report the news.

Perhaps realizing that you are not responsible for the decisions of your clients will alleviate some of your angst.

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

7 June 2007
I would suggest taking a few classes in the taxation of C corps, S Corps, partnerships, and LLCs. In each good course, a comparison with other entity types should be given. Then you will have the basis for a discussion of the pros and cons of each type.

I don't think any of us were comfortable with this type of discussion from only the preparation for passing an exam for a license.

JR1 (talk|edits) said:

June 7, 2007
A good biz entity seminar would help you a lot...it's not difficult, tho', once you boil down the issues. We learn more from the headaches and heartaches our clients experience than anything. You wander along not caring that a client has real estate inside his C corp which has been there since 1975. Until he says, "OK, I'm ready to sell the company and want to keep the building," and you do the math. Then you understand and will never forget.

Focus246 (talk|edits) said:

7 June 2007
Thanks to all. Your input is greatly appeciated. I'm going to find a CPE course in the Atlanta area.

JR1 (talk|edits) said:

June 7, 2007
My picks: Bob Jennings [www.taxspeaker.com], GearUp, NCPE (tho they like C corps way too much), can't access NATP's site for somereason. Kevin can update it. I have [www.natptax.com] but it's dead.

FLAcct (talk|edits) said:

7 June 2007
JR1 - Are there no exceptions to an S corp holding real estate? In Florida, commercial rentals are charged 6% sales tax. So you if you run a business through an S corp and then pay your LLC (which owns the real estate) rent, you have to pay 6% sales tax to the State of Florida. This can add up to quite a bit of money over the years and often clients just can't get passed that.

JR1 (talk|edits) said:

June 7, 2007
Well, I did write as an IL accountant primarily. That 6% would suck. So does CA's LLC annual charge. And yet, keeping RE inside a corp, even an S, is fraught with problems if you ever want to remove it. Suppose the owners are ready to sell out, and as is common, want to hold onto the building? To merely 'transfer' it to themselves personally, they're stuck with a deemed sales and created income tax out of the air. So then they have to find some other way, by keeping it in a corp...leaving the problem to someone else one day. Maybe they'll die with the RE inside the S as its only asset, effectively stepping up the basis of the whole thing, where the heirs can kill the corp and get the RE out for free... Glad I don't live in FL.

Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said:

7 June 2007
Death as the equalize is a misconception, isn't it, JR? Value of the stock in the individual's hand rises to date of death value, but the assets in the corporation do not appreciate and if sold there, would not the gains still flow through to the heirs? Death would simply mean time to liquidate.

JR1 (talk|edits) said:

June 7, 2007
With the RE as the only asset, the value of the stock tracks identically with the value of the underlying RE. Rare, I know, but I have one like that. And in an S, no tax on the liq. of the corp/transfer of the RE.

FLAcct (talk|edits) said:

7 June 2007
Then I believe if the sole stockholder dies, the real estate inside the s corp is sold and in the same year the s corporation is closed, the gain from the sale of the real estate that would pass through to the stockholder's heir would be offset by the loss of the stepped up basis of the capital stock. Am I correct?

JR1 (talk|edits) said:

June 7, 2007
'Zactly.

Bottom Line (talk|edits) said:

9 June 2007
JR - given the tax options (and despite paying sales tax on a commercial rental), FL is a good option vs the other states. No state income tax!

FLAcct - do a comparison of local rental rates and have the business pay toward the low end of that range. Be sure to document the rates. Don't forget that Common Area Maintenance is exempt from sales tax and have the tenant pay as many expenses as possibile (utilities, janitor, insurance, RE taxes) to keep the rent as low as possible.

To join in on this discussion, you must first log in.
Personal tools