Ronald A. Caselli v. Commissioner , 2018 T.C. Memo. 81 ( 2018 )


Menu:
  •                               
    T.C. Memo. 2018-81
    UNITED STATES TAX COURT
    RONALD A. CASELLI, Petitioner v.
    COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
    Docket Nos. 835-11, 29664-11.               Filed June 12, 2018.
    David M. Kirsch, for petitioner.
    Rachel L. Hester and Pamela G. Kartha, for respondent.
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    COHEN, Judge: Respondent determined deficiencies of $260,798 and
    $203,695 in petitioner’s Federal income tax for 2006 and 2007, respectively.
    Respondent also determined civil fraud penalties under section 6663 of $195,598
    and $152,771 for 2006 and 2007, respectively. After concessions, the sole issue
    remaining for decision is whether an S corporation may revoke its election of
    -2-
    [*2] deducting certain employment tax expenses for 2006 and 2007 and claim
    section 45B credits solely by the request of one of its shareholders acting solely in
    his capacity as a shareholder, which will in effect enable the shareholder to nullify
    the S corporation’s election unilaterally and retroactively.
    Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal
    Revenue Code in effect for the years in issue, and all Rule references are to the
    Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.
    Background
    These consolidated cases were submitted fully stipulated under Rule 122.
    The stipulated facts are incorporated as our findings by this reference. Petitioner
    resided in California at the time he filed his petitions.
    During 2006 and 2007, petitioner was one of the three shareholders of
    Apple Gilroy, Inc. (AGI), an S corporation operating multiple restaurants. The
    restaurants owned by AGI hired “tipped employees”, whose earnings came partly
    from customer tips, and AGI was required to pay taxes on these tips as part of its
    Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) tax payments. Under section 45B, an
    employer working in the food and beverage industry is allowed to claim business
    tax credits for the portion of the FICA taxes it paid on the employee tips (FICA tip
    credits).
    -3-
    [*3] AGI filed its 2006 and 2007 Forms 1120S, U.S. Income Tax Return for an S
    Corporation, on September 14, 2007, and August 22, 2008, respectively. It did not
    claim any FICA tip credits for either year on its Form 1120S or file Form 8846,
    Credit for Employer Social Security and Medicare Taxes Paid on Certain
    Employee Tips. Instead, it deducted its payments of the FICA tip taxes on its
    Forms 1120S. AGI never filed an amended Form 1120S for either year.
    Petitioner filed his 2006 and 2007 Forms 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax
    Return, on October 17, 2007 and on October 16, 2008, respectively. On both of
    these returns he claimed flowthrough deductions deriving from AGI. On October
    12, 2010, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) sent a notice of deficiency to
    petitioner for 2006. Petitioner timely petitioned this Court on January 10, 2011.
    On September 22, 2011, petitioner filed a Form 1040X, Amended U.S.
    Individual Income Tax Return, for 2007 claiming a refund of $65,526 deriving
    from AGI’s 2007 FICA tip credits. Petitioner’s 2007 Form 1040X included a
    Form 8846, which showed petitioner as the taxpayer electing the FICA tip credits.
    Petitioner’s 2007 Form 1040X did not include an amended Schedule K-1,
    Shareholder’s Share of Income, Deductions, Credits, etc., from AGI.
    On October 4, 2011, the IRS sent a notice of deficiency to petitioner for
    2007. A notice of claim disallowance was attached to the 2007 notice of
    -4-
    [*4] deficiency, which disallowed petitioner’s claim for refund on the 2007 Form
    1040X. Petitioner timely petitioned this Court on December 27, 2011. On August
    19, 2014, petitioner filed an amended petition for 2006, claiming for the first time
    that he was also entitled to the flowthrough FICA tip credits with respect to his
    interest in AGI for 2006.
    Discussion
    Petitioner argues that we should hold that AGI may claim credits under
    section 45B by filing amended returns for 2006 and 2007. Because AGI has never
    filed any amended returns, petitioner is essentially requesting an advisory opinion
    based upon a future contingency. Normally, we would decline such a request.
    However, since there is little development of the law concerning section 45B in
    cases or otherwise, it is useful and expedient to discuss the provision and its
    application to the facts before us.
    Section 45B allows an eligible employer, upon its election, to claim a
    business tax credit in the amount of FICA taxes that it paid on employee tips in
    excess of the minimum wage. To qualify for the FICA tip credit, an employer
    must have employees who receive tips from customers for providing food or
    beverages for consumption and must be deemed to have paid FICA taxes on the
    tips in excess of the minimum wage. Sec. 45B(b). Additionally, the employer
    -5-
    [*5] must not have already claimed a deduction for the FICA tax payment. Sec.
    45B(c). The IRS prescribes Form 8846 for eligible employers to claim any FICA
    tip credits. I.R.S. News Release IR-2007-155 (Sept. 5, 2007).
    Petitioner claims that as one of AGI’s shareholders, he is entitled to a
    proportionate flowthrough of the tax credits arising from AGI’s FICA tax
    payments. However, the parties dispute whether AGI was itself entitled to the
    FICA tip credits for 2006 and 2007. The parties agree that for both years, AGI
    was an employer of employees who received tips from customers for providing
    food or beverages for consumption and AGI had paid FICA taxes on these tips.
    They disagree on whether AGI’s choice of deducting its FICA tax payments for
    2006 and 2007 prevents it from now claiming any FICA tip credits for either year.
    The answer seems quite straightforward. Section 45B(c) explicitly provides
    that “[n]o deduction shall be allowed under this chapter for any amount taken into
    account in determining the credit under this section.” Section 45B(d), titled
    “Election Not to Claim Credit”, further provides that “[t]his section shall not apply
    to a taxpayer for any taxable year if such taxpayer elects to have this section not
    apply for such taxable year.” In combination, these two provisions suggest that
    when AGI chose to deduct its FICA tax payments, it had made an election not to
    claim any FICA tip credits. Indeed, AGI never claimed, or intended to claim,
    -6-
    [*6] FICA tip credits for 2006 or 2007. Consequently, on the basis of AGI’s
    reporting position, petitioner is not entitled to any flowthrough FICA tip credits
    for either year.
    Petitioner agrees that AGI elected not to claim any FICA tip credits.
    Nonetheless, he asserts that AGI now seeks to change its election and “may claim
    the FICA Tips Credit pursuant to Section 45B” by filing amended returns. The
    evidence in the record contradicts his assertion. AGI has never stated its intention
    to change the election it made more than nine years ago. Petitioner’s assertion, in
    effect, is that AGI’s election could be changed unilaterally by his request made in
    his capacity as a shareholder.
    Respondent’s position, by contrast, is that any election regarding section
    45B should be made by AGI directly, not through a shareholder’s request.
    Petitioner, in his sole capacity as one of AGI’s shareholders, cannot change AGI’s
    election of not claiming any FICA tip credits. We agree with respondent.
    As a general rule, any election affecting the computation of items derived
    from an S corporation shall be made by the corporation. Sec. 1363(c)(1). Section
    1.1363-1(c)(1), Income Tax Regs., further indicates that individual shareholders
    cannot make such an election: “Any elections (other than those described in
    paragraph (c)(2) of this section) affecting the computation of items derived from
    -7-
    [*7] an S corporation are made by the corporation[,] * * * and not by the
    shareholders separately.” This general rule is subject to two exceptions, namely,
    elections under section 617 (relating to deduction and recapture of certain mining
    exploration expenditures) and elections under section 901 (relating to foreign tax
    credits). Sec. 1363(c)(2). The parties agree that the election under section 45B in
    this case does not fall into either of the statutory exceptions.
    Section 45B(d) specifically provides that “[t]his section shall not apply to a
    taxpayer for any taxable year if such taxpayer elects to have this section not apply
    for such taxable year.” (Emphasis added.) While S corporations are generally not
    considered to be taxpayers, employment taxes are the liabilities of the employer,
    which is the taxpayer in this context. Petitioner’s position is not tenable in the
    face of the plain text of section 1363(c) and section 45B(d).
    Petitioner is essentially asking us to create a new precedent, which will
    endow each individual shareholder with the power to change an S corporation’s
    tax election unilaterally. Such a unilateral change, if allowed, would not only
    affect the tax liabilities of the requesting shareholder but could also affect the tax
    liabilities of the shareholders who have not consented to such a change. Petitioner
    himself highlighted the danger of this approach by assuring us that “[a]ny change
    to AGI’s tax items for the years 2006 and 2007 will not have any effect” on other
    -8-
    [*8] AGI shareholders because of their special circumstances and by attempting to
    persuade us that there is no unfairness in this particular case. We decline to create
    a new precedent.
    For the foregoing reasons, petitioner is not allowed to claim any FICA tip
    credits flowing from AGI. We have considered all remaining arguments made by
    both parties for a result contrary to that expressed herein, and, to the extent not
    discussed above, they are irrelevant to our decision or without merit.
    To reflect the foregoing,
    Decisions will be entered
    under Rule 155.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 835-11, 29664-11

Citation Numbers: 2018 T.C. Memo. 81

Filed Date: 6/12/2018

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 2/3/2020