
James F. McDonough
Of Counsel
732-568-8360 jmcdonough@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: James F. McDonough
Date: April 8, 2014
Of Counsel
732-568-8360 jmcdonough@sh-law.comOne of the hard-fought issues between taxpayers and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) was whether a trust could qualify for the passive activities exception. Specifically, activities are grouped into one of two categories, either active or passive. The goal of §469 was to prevent losses from a passive activity from offsetting active income. If one can recall the heyday of the tax shelter industry when losses from passive activities offset earned income (e.g., salary) and cause less income tax to be collected. The 1986 Tax Reform Act contained the passive loss rules §469 that were designed to segregate active and passive income and loss.
The passive loss rules contain an exception under §469(c)(7) whereby a taxpayer who satisfies the material participation test will be able to classify the income or loss as active. Why is this important? The Affordable Care Act introduced a 3.8% income tax surcharge on passive income that could be avoided if the trust materially participates. The other alternative is that losses, rather than being trapped, can be used against active income.
How does a trust qualify for the §469(c)(7) exception? The Tax Court held the taxpayer meets the requirement if more than one-half of the services are in real property trades or businesses in which he materially participates. The Tax Court agreed with the taxpayer and held that the activities of the trustee can be used to measure material participation. This is the pro-taxpayer aspect of the case. IRS had maintained the legislative history referred only to natural persons and C corporations as qualifying for material participation under this provision.
Trustees and advisors should review their real estate holdings in order to determine if they can avail themselves of the holding.
Aragona has some unique facts. The Trust owns rental real property and entities that hold and develop real estate. The Trust was managed by one independent trustee and the Grantor’s five children. One limited liability company (LLC) wholly owned by the Trust employed three children and managed trust properties.
Each one of the six trustees was paid a fee by the Trust. In 2005 and 2006, the Trust treated these payments as losses from non-passive activities. The IRS wanted the losses classified as passive activity losses.
The ability of a taxpayer to avoid passive characterization is very helpful as Aragona is a better reasoned opinion than the Mattie Carter Trust out of a District Court in Texas.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
NYC Real Estate and Litigation Attorney Ryan O. Miller and Team Join Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC New York City, NY – August 13, 2025 – Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC has strengthened its Real Estate and Litigation practices with the addition of four New York City-based attorneys. Ryan Miller, who joins as a partner, is well known for […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Business law plays a critical role in nearly every aspect of running a successful enterprise, from negotiating a commercial lease to drafting employee policies to fulfilling corporate disclosure obligations. Understanding what is business law and your legal obligations can help your business run smoothly and build productive relationships with clients, business partners, regulators, and others. […]
Author: Dan Brecher
Corporate transactions can have significant implications for a corporation and its stakeholders. For deals to be successful, companies must act strategically to maximize value and minimize risk. It is also important to fully understand the legal and financial ramifications of corporate transactions, both in the near and long term. Understanding Corporate Transactions The term “corporate […]
Author: Dan Brecher
Ongoing economic uncertainty is forcing many companies to make tough decisions, which includes lowering staff levels. The legal landscape on both the state and federal level also continues to evolve, especially with significant changes to the priorities of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) under the Trump Administration. Terminating an employee is one of the […]
Author: Angela A. Turiano
While filing annual reports may seem like a nuisance, failing to do so can have significant ramifications. These include fines, reputational harm, and interruption of your business operations. In basic terms, “admin dissolution for annual report” means that a company is dissolved by the government. This happens because it failed to submit its annual report […]
Author: Dan Brecher
Antitrust laws are designed to ensure that businesses compete fairly. There are three federal antitrust laws that businesses must navigate. These include the Sherman Act, the Federal Trade Commission Act, and the Clayton Act. States also have their own antitrust regimes. These may vary from federal regulations. Understanding antitrust litigation helps businesses navigate these complex […]
Author: Robert E. Levy
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!