New Tax Act May Be Complicated, But the Savings Potential Is Significant
It is stunning how few people realize the significance of one provision of the new Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, which became effective earlier this year. Perhaps the reason for this is that it is conceptually complicated, but that should be your tax professional's problem; it should not be yours.
June 18, 2018 at 10:25 AM
4 minute read
It is stunning how few people realize the significance of one provision of the new Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, which became effective earlier this year. Perhaps the reason for this is that it is conceptually complicated, but that should be your tax professional's problem; it should not be yours.
Under the new Tax Act, independent contractors and small business owners fared very well. Employees who do not own an interest in a business got hurt.
Independent contractors and owners of small businesses received what is known as the Qualified Income Deduction (QID), which could reduce their taxable income by up to 20 percent. Given the progressive rate structure, this could reduce their federal income tax by more than 20 percent.
Employees who do not own a business do not qualify for the QID. What they got instead was a prohibition on deducting expenses relating to their employment such as union dues and costs of uniforms.
The computation of the QID is both a function of your personal taxable income and the allocable share of your trade or business income. Then there are limitations for certain individuals whose personal taxable income exceeds certain amounts. In addition, all businesses are not created equal. Certain businesses, such as professional practices, including doctors, lawyers and CPAs, are subject to additional limitations. Conveniently, engineers and real estate developers are exempt from the second limitation.
The key to maximizing the QID is to maximize the amount of income that qualifies for this deduction and work around the various limitations. This could be done by the following:
- Adjust personal taxable income either up or down to qualify for a larger deduction.
- Spin off certain assets or businesses that are now conducted in one entity into multiple entities.
- Increase or decrease W-2 compensation at the entity level to owners and others.
- Increase or decrease amounts contributed to a qualified retirement plan.
- Purchase business assets at the entity level or at the individual level.
- Become an independent contractor.
- Change from a “C” corporation to an “S” corporation.
- Change from an “S” corporation to an LLC to be treated as a partnership or disregarded entity for tax purposes or vice versa.
- Create trusts for the benefit of family members (e.g., children) to own a portion of the business entity.
The last item is often ignored, but could be the most important. In addition to increasing the QID, it could reduce the family's overall income tax by use of multiple income tax brackets. Funds in the trusts could be used to finance the children's education and assist them in the purchase of a home or business, at reduced tax rates.
Like all matters of this complexity, it is important not to solve one problem and create another. While many of the issues to consider are tax related, some are not. There are asset protection issues, estate planning issues, control issues, compliance costs, regulatory issues, and more. It is important to remember the adage, “First, do no harm.”
This type of work should only be done by a well-qualified, experienced attorney with a background in the areas discussed.
The new tax laws may be complicated, but don't let that stop you from benefiting from potentially significant tax savings in 2018.
Robert Kramer is a partner with Kramer, Green, Zuckerman, Greene & Buchsbaum in Hollywood.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllInitial Steps to Set Up a Fla. Appeal: Your Future Self (or Appellate Attorney) Will Thank You
6 minute readDivorce Timing Is Everything: Waiting for the New Year May Have Its Advantages
4 minute readMotions for Summary Judgment and Discovery: The 2021 Rule Changes Continue to Emerge
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'Self-Diagnosed Nickel Allergy' Fails to Find Success in Med-Mal Suit, 8th Circuit Rules
- 2Eversheds Sutherland Adds Hunton Andrews Energy Lawyer With Cross-Border Experience
- 3Balancing Judicial Authority: Understanding Sanctions, Severance, and Interferences
- 4Up in the Air: Boeing’s Deferred Prosecution Saga Continues
- 5Legal Tech's Predictions for Knowledge Management in 2025
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250