City of Los Angeles Business License Tax Returns

City of Los Angeles Business License Tax Returns are due by the end of February of the year following the subject tax year. There are several exemptions, the most important of which being, that for businesses that register and file their tax returns on time, there is no tax. So it is extremely important to file, or have your accountant file, the return on time.

Online filing is available for renewals only on the City of Los Angeles Office of Finance web site: https://latax.lacity.org/laweb/

2008 Standard Mileage Rate

The IRS' standard mileage rate for calendar year 2008 business miles has been increased to 50.5 cents per mile driven, up from 48.5 cents per mile in 2007.

See below for more complete information:

WASHINGTON — The Internal Revenue Service today issued the 2008 optional standard mileage rates used to calculate the deductible costs of operating an automobile for business, charitable, medical or moving purposes.

Beginning Jan. 1, 2008, the standard mileage rates for the use of a car (including vans, pickups or panel trucks) will be:

50.5 cents per mile for business miles driven;
19 cents per mile driven for medical or moving purposes; and
14 cents per mile driven in service of charitable organizations.
The new rate for business miles compares to a rate of 48.5 cents per mile for 2007. The new rate for medical and moving purposes compares to 20 cents in 2007. The rate for miles driven in service of charitable organizations has remained the same.

The standard mileage rate for business is based on an annual study of the fixed and variable costs of operating an automobile; the standard rate for medical and moving purposes is based on the variable costs as determined by the same study. Runzheimer International, an independent contractor, conducted the study for the IRS.

The mileage rate for charitable miles is set by law.

A taxpayer may not use the business standard mileage rate for a vehicle after using any depreciation method under the Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System (MACRS), after claiming a Section 179 deduction for that vehicle, for any vehicle used for hire or for more than four vehicles used simultaneously.

IRS Announces 2007 Standard Mileage Rates, irs.gov, posted November 27, 2007

New 2008 California Notary Block

Effective today, January 1, 2008, all legal documents to be notarized in California must use the following notary block:

State of California
County of ___________

On ______________________ before me, (here insert name and title of the officer), personally appeared __________________ who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature ____________________________ (Seal)

Reference: California Civil Code Section 1189
California notary block PDF format; California Secretary of State

California power of attorneys also now require a thumb print upon execution.

California EDD Free Tax Compliance Seminars for Employers

The California Employment Development Department (CA EDD), offers free seminars for California employers, to assist them in complying with payroll, unemployment insurance, and disability reporting and deductions for their employees. For many, your business attorney, accountant, and payroll service will handle these issues for you; for those without such assistance, these seminars may be a good place to learn the basic of complying with the numerous laws applicable to any employer.

Some upcoming Southern California seminars are as follows:

Avoiding State Payroll Reporting Errors Tax Seminar, Huntington Beach 1/17/08;

Employee or Independent Contractor Tax Seminar, Anaheim 12/20/07, Huntington Beach 1/1/7/08, Santa Fe Springs 1/4/08;

How to Manage Unemployment Insurance Costs Tax Seminar, Goleta 12/5/07, Oxnard 1/25/08;

State Basic Payroll Tax Seminar, Huntington Beach 11/29/07, Santa Fe Springs 12/6/07;

State Payroll Workship Tax Seminar, Goleta 1/29/08, Huntington, Beach 12/19/07, Oxnard 1/8/08, Santa Fe Springs 11/28/07.

For a full list of EDD seminars offered throughout the year, see
http://www.edd.ca.gov/Payroll_Tax_Seminars/

Bankrate.com Survey: 76% Believe Everyone Should Have a Will, But 57% Don't Have One

Even though three-quarters of our poll respondents (76 percent) believe that everyone should have a will, a whopping 57 percent of Americans don't have one themselves.

Parents of kids younger than 18 make an even poorer showing: 67 percent don't have a will, despite the fact that 88 percent of parents believe wills are an important way to appoint guardians....

This tendency to procrastinate is common to people of all education levels and walks of life, says Marshall Jones, an attorney and accredited estate planner at RMJ Family Wealth Planning in West Palm Beach, Fla.

"It's not surprising that most people don't have a will," he says. "Most attorneys don't have a will.

"Before I was in law school, the chairman of the U.S. Senate Finance Committee died. He was a wealthy man in his own right and his committee was responsible for tax legislation. They found his will in his desk drawer ... unsigned. His family paid millions more in taxes because he did not complete his planning. Not much has changed since then. Many successful people plan every thing else in their lives except their estate plan."

Americans' words and deeds about wills at odds, Bankrate.com, November 19, 2007

Billionaries fight estate tax repeal

Billionaire Warren Buffet, one of the world's richest men who, critics note, will personally avoid the payment of most or all death taxes on his estate by giving most of it away to charity, went to Congress today to encourage Democrats to retain the estate tax, against the wishes of the Bush Administration and small business groups:

Billionaire investor Warren Buffett urged senators Wednesday to reject calls by the Bush administration and business groups to permanently repeal the estate tax.

"A progressive and meaningful estate tax is needed to curb the movement of a democracy toward plutocracy," Buffett, the chairman of Berkshire Hathaway told the Senate Finance Committee.

Buffett has long opposed efforts to repeal the tax.

Under the tax-cut package signed by President Bush in 2001, the exemption on the estate tax increases each year, culminating in full repeal in 2010. But the legislation expires at the end of 2010, and estate tax levels return to their pre-2001 levels -- a top tax rate of 55% on inheritances of more than $1 million -- in 2011.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., said he supports full repeal, but that such a measure doesn't have adequate support. Baucus, noting that less than 1% of families are now subject to the tax, urged lawmakers and others to craft measures designed to exempt most family-owned farms and small businesses.
Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa, the committee's senior Republican, repeated a call for full repeal.

Grassley said the prospect of family members being forced to sell a business to meet a tax bill shows that the estate tax is fatally flawed from a technical standpoint.
"Instead of the free market determining when assets are bought or sold, the death tax makes that determination," Grassley said....

Buffett urges Senate to oppose estate-tax repeal, CBS Marketwatch, November 14, 2007

See also: Senate Plan to Repeal Inheritance Tax Fails, Washington Post, June 9, 2006

Hillary Clinton, Democrat for President, on the Estate Tax

In the first in a series, California Business Law Blog examines the Republican and Democrat presidential candidates' stance on the estate tax, sometimes also know as the death tax or ibheritance tax. First up, Senator Hillary Clinton (Democrat - New York):

Her current presidential platform proposal, which is to some extent inconsistent with her prior voting record, as can be seen below, is to freeze the federal estate tax at 2009 levels, that is, a $3.5 million exemption (she describes this as a $7 million exemption, presumably meaning, for a married couple, the combined total of $7 million in exemptions, which requires proper estate planning to take advantage of). As a result of the "Bush tax cut", the estate tax has been trending downward each year and is currently slated to be completely elminated in 2010 (unlimited exemption amount, 0% tax rate, leading to numerous estate planning jokes centering around solving estate tax problems by planning to die in 2010). However, due to a legislative compromise and other technicalities, it is also scheduled to jump back to tge old, higher tax levels commencing 2011 (only $1 million exemption, 55% tax rate on the balance). It is unlikely give the current political climate that the currently-scheduled death tax rates for 2011 will be allowed to stand unchanged.

For reference purposes, as this is written, in 2007, the exemption amount is $2 million, and the estate tax rate is 45%.

Recently, on the campaign trail in Derry, New Hampshire, Clinton --

answered questions from voters at a town hall at the opera house here, which was her second stop on a two-day swing through the state.

The first question from the audience after Clinton's speech came from a woman who challenged her plan to pay for universal retirement accounts by freezing the estate tax at 2009 levels. The woman said the money from inheritance had already been taxed when it was earned and she felt taxing it again was the wrong way to fund Clinton's plan.

"People disagree about this, but the estate tax, which came into being by Republicans like Teddy Roosevelt and others, and has been part of our tax system for a very long time is there for a real simple reason: In America, we've never liked the idea of massive inherited wealth," Clinton replied. "Part of the reason why America has always remained a meritocracy where you have to work for what you get, where you have to get out there, make your case to people, come up with a good idea, is that we never had a class of people sitting on generation after generation after generation of huge inherited wealth."

Clinton said people like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet were against doing away with the estate tax, because they made it on their own. She went on to explain, to applause, that a married couple could have an estate worth up to $7 million before getting taxed, and said she considered that a "pretty healthy estate to leave to your children."

Source: MSNBC.com: Clinton Questioned on Estate Tax, October 10, 2007

Critics of Clinton's, Gates', and Buffet's argument - not present to state their arguments in New Hampshire - point out that these men are so wealthy that they do not represent the typical high net worth family that is often attempting to pass a family business or farm along to the next generation, and are millionaries, not billionaires. Gates and Buffet deal in publicly traded companies, and cannot pass along Microsoft or Berkshire Hathaway, each worth billions beyond the personal wealth of either businessman and each owned by thousands of investors, to their children.

---

As a Senator, she has had the opportunity to vote on the issue serveral times:

Voted NO on raising estate tax exemption to $5 million.

An amendment to raise the death tax exemption to $5 million; reducing the maximum death tax rate to 35%; and to promote economic growth by extending the lower tax rates on dividends and capital gains.

(Proponents recommend voting YES because:

It is disappointing to many family businesses and farm owners to set the death tax rate at what I believe is a confiscatory 45% and set the exemption at only $3.5 million, which most of us believe is too low. This leaves more than 22,000 families subject to the estate tax each year.

Opponents recommend voting NO because:

You can extend all the tax breaks that have been described in this amendment if you pay for them. The problem with the amendment is that over $70 billion is not paid for. It goes on the deficit, which will drive the budget right out of balance. We will be going right back into the deficit ditch. Let us resist this amendment. People could support it if it was paid for, but it is not. However well intended the amendment is, it spends $72.5 billion with no offset. This amendment blows the budget. This amendment takes us from a balance in 2012 right back into deficit. My colleagues can extend those tax cuts if they pay for them, if they offset them. This amendment does not pay for them; it does not offset them; it takes us back into deficit. It ought to be defeated.

Reference: Kyl Amendment; Bill S.Amdt.507 on S.Con.Res.21 ; vote number 2007-083 on Mar 21, 2007);

Voted NO on supporting permanence of estate tax cuts.

Increases the estate tax exclusion to $5,000,000, effective 2015, and repeals the sunset provision for the estate and generation-skipping taxes. Lowers the estate tax rate to equal the current long-term capital gains tax rate (i.e., 15% through 2010) for taxable estates up to $25 million. Repeals after 2009 the estate tax deduction paid to states.

(Proponents recommend voting YES because:

The permanent solution to the death tax challenge that we have today is a compromise. It is a compromise that prevents the death rate from escalating to 55% and the exclusion dropping to $1 million in 2011. It also includes a minimum wage increase, 40% over the next 3 years. Voting YES is a vote for that permanent death tax relief. Voting YES is for that extension of tax relief. Voting YES is for that 40% minimum wage increase. This gives us the opportunity to address an issue that will affect the typical American family, farmers, & small business owners.

Opponents recommend voting NO because:

Family businesses and family farms should not be broken up to pay taxes. With the booming economy of the 1990s, many more Americans joined the ranks of those who could face estate taxes. Raising the exemption level and lowering the rate in past legislation made sense. Under current law, in my State of Delaware, fewer than 50 families will face any estate tax in 2009. I oppose this legislation's complete repeal of the estate tax because it will cost us $750 billion. Given the world we live in today, with clear domestic needs unmet, full repeal is a luxury that we cannot afford.

To add insult to this injury, the first pay raise for minimum wage workers in 10 years is now hostage to this estate tax cut. We are told that to get those folks on minimum wage a raise, we have to go into debt, so that the sons and daughters of the 7,000 most fortunate families among us will be spared the estate tax. We must say no to this transparent gimmick.

Reference: Estate Tax and Extension of Tax Relief Act; Bill H.R. 5970 ; vote number 2006-229 on Aug 3, 2006);

Voted NO on permanently repealing the "death tax".

A cloture motion ends debate and forces a vote on the issue. In this case, voting YES implies support for permanently repealing the death tax. Voting against cloture would allow further amendments. A cloture motion requires a 3/5th majority to pass. This cloture motion failed, and there was therefore no vote on repealing the death tax.

(Proponents of the motion say:
We already pay enough taxes over our lifetimes We are taxed from that first cup of coffee in the morning to the time we flip off the lights at bedtime. If you are an enterprising entrepreneur who has worked hard to grow a family business or to keep and maintain that family farm, your spouse and children can expect to hear the knock of the tax man right after the Grim Reaper.
In the past, when Congress enacted a death tax, it was at an extraordinary time of war, and the purpose was to raise temporary funds. But after the war was over the death tax was repealed. But that changed in the last century. The death tax was imposed and has never been lifted.
The death tax tells people it is better to consume today than to invest for the future. That doesn't make sense.

Opponents of the motion say:

Small businesses and farms rarely--if ever--are forced to sell off assets or close up shop to pay the tax. Under the current exemption, roughly 99% of estates owe nothing in estate taxes. By 2011, with a $3.5 million exemption, only two of every 100,000 people who die that year would be subject to the estate tax.
Today's vote is on a motion to proceed to a bill to repeal the estate tax. Not to proceed to a compromise or any other deal--but to full repeal. I oppose full repeal of the estate tax. Our Nation can no longer afford this tax break for the very well off. Permanently repealing the estate tax would add about $1 trillion to our national debt from 2011 to 2021.

Reference: Death Tax Repeal Permanency Act; Bill HR 8 ; vote number 2006-164 on Jun 8, 2006).

Source: On the Issues: Hillary Clinton on Tax Reform

The conservative Club for Growth, which favor repeal of the estate tax, rated Clinton's voting record 8 out of 100 for 2006 for pro-growth economic policies.

See also:

John McCain, Republican for President, on the Estate Tax
Barack Obama, Democrat for President, on the Estate Tax
Hillary Clinton Offical Site: Economic Blueprint

June 2008 update: Hillary Clinton ended her 2008 bid for the White House on June 7, 2008, leaving Barack Obama as the presumptive Democrat nominee.