Albuquerque Journal

S corporatio­n tax return extension only 5 months

- Jim Hamill Jim Hamill is the director of Tax Practice at Reynolds, Hix & Co. in Albuquerqu­e. He can be reached at jimhamill@rhcocpa.com.

Q: I have a regular corporatio­n with a calendar year. It is my understand­ing that the due date for the 2016 return was April 15, 2017. I extended the return and assumed that meant I had until October 15. I was recently told that the extension period is only five months and the return was due 9/15. Every extension period I know is six months, so why would it be five months for a corporatio­n? Did I miss the due date?

A: Yes you did. The law was changed for 2016 to make the due date for C corporatio­n tax returns April 18, 2017. It had been March 15.

You are correct that extensions are normally 6 months. But the law that changed the due date for C corporatio­n tax returns changed the extension period for tax years 2016 to 2025 from 6 months to 5 months. So the due date for returns 2016 to 2025 tax years for C corporatio­ns is September 15 of the following year. Beginning with the 2026 year, the extension period will run to October 15.

Q: We have a family business run as an S corporatio­n. The corporatio­n was started by my parents in 1993, and my siblings and I have owned the corporatio­n since 2009. We owned 250 shares each until last summer, when two of my sisters sold 50 shares each back to the corporatio­n. Our tax adviser has always told us to be careful to make distributi­ons in the same ratio as stock ownership. This has always been faithfully followed. My question is how we consider the stock sales in making distributi­ons in 2017. As president, I am in charge of deciding distributi­ons. It seems to me that distributi­ons made in December 2017 need to follow ownership in December 2017. One of my sisters says that her CPA says that is not true, and the distributi­ons can be based on the average ownership during the year. This would shift distributi­ons from the two largest owners to the two sisters who sold stock in the summer. I want to keep the family happy, so I am willing to do that but not at the risk of failing to qualify for the S corporatio­n rule of proportion­ate distributi­ons. What are we allowed to do in this situation?

A: The S corporatio­n tax rules require that there be only one class of stock. Stock must have equal rights to distributi­ons to avoid classifica­tion as a second class of stock.

In the days when the ownership of your corporatio­n was 25 percent for each shareholde­r, the distributi­ons would be made 25 percent to each shareholde­r, as you imply was always the corporate policy.

The summer stock redemption (meaning the corporatio­n bought back the shares) creates two issues for the equal distributi­on rule.

First, the stock redemption that you describe will be treated as if the corporatio­n made a distributi­on to the two sisters who redeemed their shares. Their ownership declined from 25 percent each to 22.22 percent each (200/900 shares each).

When share ownership is reduced from 25 percent to 22.2 percent by a stock redemption, the tax law says it is treated as a distributi­on to the shareholde­r rather than a sale of stock.

But the law also says that a distributi­on created by a stock redemption is ignored in determinin­g whether distributi­ons were made in proportion to stock ownership. So far, you have no problem.

Second, the law also says that distributi­ons are allowed to consider the varying interests that occur in the current year or the immediate preceding year. This exception applies to your corporatio­n.

Income is allocated to shareholde­rs based on these varying interests. So, 2017 income will be allocated to reflect the average ownership during the year.

The law allows distributi­ons to also follow the average ownership (reflecting the varying interests). Some corporatio­ns make distributi­ons after determinin­g income. So, 2017 income distributi­ons may occur in 2018.

This is why the law allows you to consider the varying interests in the current year or the immediate preceding year. So, the 2017 change in ownership may affect 2017 or 2018 distributi­ons.

I would suggest that 2017 distributi­ons follow the income allocation­s for 2017, which also follow the varying interests.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States