• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Partnership "opt-out"

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Whoops2u

Active Member
Can an LLC that has a member that is a living trust opt out of entity taxation?

As most know, there was a huge tax bill passed recently. One part of it has to do with auditing partnerships and a change that, if there is a negative adjustment to the partnership, rather than amending the K-1s and getting the partners to pay their share at their rate, the IRS will collect directly from the partnership at the highest individual rate.

Under certain regulations, the partnership may opt-out of this treatment. There is a required election the partnership can make to have the partnership be treated as it is under previous law.

I just got a blast email from an adviser warning that if even a single member of the LLC (I know I said partnership, but the email uses both interchangeably in this instance.) is a trust, living trust, another LLC or even a single member LLC, the election cannot be made.

Does anyone have support for this? Much of the writing on the new law only includes bits and pieces and preliminary impressions. Yet, time is getting short to change entity ownership if partners or members don't want an extra plus tax penalty on partnership and LLC audits. Historically, partnership and LLC audits are not often done. In part, I assume, because of the difficulty of getting a new K-1 issued and the money obtained from the pass-through. This and some other changes have me believe the historical percentage of LLC/Partnership audits is going to look quaint in the years to come.
 


LdiJ

Senior Member
I've found the proposed final rules ARE saying what the blast alleged. An LLC/Partnership cannot opt out if one of the members/partners is a living or other trust. (Administrative trust for an estate does not seem included.)

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2018-01-02/pdf/2017-28398.pdf

There is a public hearing on the proposed final rules in Washington DC on September 18.
They also cannot opt out unless the partnership/LLC has fewer than 100 partners/members.
 

Whoops2u

Active Member
They also cannot opt out unless the partnership/LLC has fewer than 100 partners/members.
Thanks for helping as I was looking for your input, but, the other requirement for the election has to do with "statements required to be furnished". If you have to furnish 100 or fewer, you have fulfilled the second element to make the election.

The reason why the difference is more than just a distinction is because how to count is a big part of the proposed rules. If a married couple own a share, that counts as two. Also, if an LLC is a member of a partnership, does that count as one? Or, does it depend on the number of LLC members. Sell your share in the year and the partnership will have to issue two statements.

The number of required statements under 6031(b), not the number of members or partners.
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
Thanks for helping as I was looking for your input, but, the other requirement for the election has to do with "statements required to be furnished". If you have to furnish 100 or fewer, you have fulfilled the second element to make the election.

The reason why the difference is more than just a distinction is because how to count is a big part of the proposed rules. If a married couple own a share, that counts as two. Also, if an LLC is a member of a partnership, does that count as one? Or, does it depend on the number of LLC members. Sell your share in the year and the partnership will have to issue two statements.

The number of required statements under 6031(b), not the number of members or partners.
I think that you might be getting a little confused here. A husband and wife can jointly own shares in a partnership but that would not mean the partnership issuing two Schedule K1s, it would only be one per account. They could also EACH own shares in the same partnership individually rather than jointly and that would be two Schedule K1s. Same for an entity owning shares in a partnership, it would still be one schedule K1.

However, its really a bit too early to be certain how all of this is going to end up being clarified. There are also a lot of other things in the new law that is going to have a far greater effect on people than the rules for partnerships.

In all reality, if any change happens in an audit its actually a lot easier on everyone, paperwork wise, if the partnership pays the tax. Its a little harsh that it has to be paid at the highest partner's tax rate but that would certainly behoove whomever is handling the partnership's book to be seriously on top of things. Really good books, a good accountable reimbursement policy and as few of fingers as possible in the cookie jar (but also enough for oversight) go a long way towards beating an audit.

The company that I was a CFO for was audited every other year by the IRS because we were 50% foreign owned. The IRS never made any changes at all, not even once.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top