Connect with us

Accounting

Financial planning for 2025 brackets and retirement rules

Published

on

Cooling inflation will bring some relief in the form of slightly lower taxes next year.

An average inflationary adjustment of 2.8% under IRS guidance for 2025 released earlier this month came in lower than the 5.4% hike for this year and a boost of more than 7% across the seven federal income brackets in 2023, according to an analysis by the nonpartisan, nonprofit Tax Foundation. 

At the same time, the slower rise in cost-of-living expenses this year led the agency’s subsequent annual announcement of the level of penalty-free limits on contributions to individual retirement accounts to stay the same, at $7,000. 

On the other hand, yearly contribution limits to 401(k), 403(b) and 457 retirement plans, as well as the federal government’s Thrift Savings Plan, will each rise by $500 in 2025 to $23,500 and a shift in the rules from the Secure 2.0 Act will give savers aged 60 to 63 a new “super catch-up” option for the first time.

READ MORE: With Congress slow to act, financial advisors plan ahead on estate taxes

The yearly protection against so-called bracket creep and the numbers involved with more than 60 other tax items put a bookend on “a continual conversation during the course of the year” about the question of “whether there are ways to reduce your income by booking losses” or “trying to take advantage of recognizing some income so you pay a lower amount of tax” for 2024 and 2025, according to Alan Weissberger, the senior tax and estate planning solution specialist with West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania-based Hirtle Callaghan. For financial advisors, tax professionals and their clients, the potential expiration of many provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act after 2025 is adding another layer to the standard year-end planning

“The actual inflation adjustment is relatively lower compared to what we’ve seen the last couple of years,” Weissberger said in an interview. “All things being equal, any taxpayer with the same amount of income is going to end up paying a little less in taxes.”

Experts often point out the significant differences in tax rates that come down to every single dollar worth of income. Via the Tax Foundation analysis, here’s how the federal tax brackets will look in 2025:

  • 10%: $0 to $11,925 (individuals or married filing separately); $0 to $23,850 (married filing jointly); $0 to $17,000 (heads of households)
  • 12%: $11,925 to $48,475; $23,850 to $96,950; $17,000 to $64,850
  • 22%: $48,475 to $103,350; $96,950 to $206,700; $64,850 to $103,350
  • 24%: $103,350 to $197,300; $206,700 to $394,600; $103,350 to $197,300
  • 32%: $197,300 to $250,525; $394,600 to $501,050; $197,300 to $250,500
  • 35%: $250,525 to $626,350; $501,050 to $751,600; $250,500 to $626,350
  • 37%: $626,350 or more; $751,600 or more; $626,350 or more

In terms of retirement savings, the two Secure Acts have altered many rules around planning. For example, many beneficiaries who have inherited IRAs know that they must begin taking their required minimum distributions in 2025 as part of a 10-year schedule that has replaced the “stretch” strategy after the IRS delayed that obligation for several years in a row.

READ MORE: Final IRS rules to IRA beneficiaries: Get going on those RMDs already

For 2025, the cost-of-living adjustments to retirement contributions did not make any impact on the ceiling on regular IRA contributions and the extra “catch-up” savings available to those 50 or older of $1,000. The “catch-up” contributions for 401(k) and other retirement-plan participants who are aged 50 or above will stay the same at $7,500, too. For those employee-plan participants between the ages of 60 and 63, a new “super catch-up” beginning next year will provide the flexibility to contribute as much as $11,250 on top of their allotted $23,500.

Those decisions could reverberate for decades in a saver’s portfolio, according to a blog earlier this year by financial educator Patrick Villanova for advisor matchmaking and personal finance service SmartAsset. Even though they started with the same value of $256,244 in their 401(k) at age 60, a sample investor named “Sam the Super Saver” racked up over $16,000 in additional savings compared to “Ian the Ignorer” by the time she turned 64 through the extra catch-up contributions. By their 90th birthdays, Sam had more than $23,000 more in portfolio value.

“Those extra dollars can add up over the course of a 25-year retirement and continue to compound along with retirement account investment growth,” Villanova wrote. “However, the potential long-term growth of those enhanced contributions simply may not be enough to entice some pre-retirees to save the extra money between ages 60 and 63.”

Planners and their clients will also be watching closely to see how this week’s election and the current sunset date at the end of 2025 for a lot of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act affect their estate and income taxes. Absent Congressional action, the minimum value of estates subject to taxes as high as 40% will revert back to half its present level.

READ MORE: 30 tax questions to answer by the end of the year

Ultrahigh net worth families that are part of the base of Hirtle Callaghan’s clients generally fall into one of three categories around the estate tax, Weissberger noted. Some have been updating their plans every year, others shifted slightly in anticipation of potential tax changes during President Joe Biden’s term and the third group includes “some clients who have done absolutely nothing for any estate planning,” he said.

“A lot of clients haven’t done anything, and they’ve been waiting and thinking that this problem is eventually going to solve itself — which doesn’t look like it’s going to happen,” Weissberger said.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Fraud guilty plea from accountant over $1.4M mortgage loan

Published

on

In a case involving phony documents and unpaid taxes, a prominent Washington, D.C.-based accountant pleaded guilty last week for making false statements on a mortgage application after failing to file IRS returns.

A certified public accountant with expertise on tax compliance and due diligence matters, Timothy Trifilo has held partner or managing director positions at several firms for over four decades. He also taught courses in taxation and real estate as an adjunct professor, the original Department of Justice indictment said. Trifilo was hired as a managing director with consulting firm Alvarez & Marsal earlier this year. 

The fraud allegations resulted from a 2023 purchase, when Trifilo applied for a $1.4 million mortgage on a Washington property. When the unidentified issuing bank advised that they could not locate recent tax returns nor approve his application without them, Trifilo submitted copies of 2021 and 2022 IRS filings to the lender, who then originated the loan.  

Investigators later discovered that, in reality, Trifilo had neither filed returns nor paid taxes for any year beginning in 2012 despite income over the subsequent decade totaling more than $7.7 million. His annual earnings ranged between $636,051 and $948,252 during that time, amounts that required him to file individual tax returns each year.

On documentation delivered to the lender in support of the mortgage application, a former colleague of Trifilo was identified as responsible for preparing, reviewing and signing the falsified returns purportedly submitted to the Internal Revenue Service.  

“This individual did not prepare the returns, has never prepared tax returns for Trifilo and did not authorize Trifilo to use his name on the returns and other documents that Trifilo submitted,” a DOJ press release said.  

A grand jury originally indicted Trifilo in September on seven counts, including bank fraud and failure to file tax returns, as well as aggravated identity theft. His actions led to a tax loss for the IRS of $2.1 million. 

He faces a maximum sentence of three decades in prison for defrauding the lender, as well as one year for failure to file tax returns. Sentencing is scheduled for May 19. 

In addition to potential prison time, Trifilo may be required to forfeit the original loan amount and property acquired through bank fraud, the original indictment stated. He also faces a period of supervised release, monetary penalties and restitution. 

Attorneys from the DOJ’s tax division prosecuted the case, with evidence based on findings from the IRS criminal investigation unit. 

Submission of phony forms and documents have played a role in multiple fraud cases this year, pointing to a pain point in the mortgage process that could end up costing lenders. Problems in income and employment data specifically had a defect rate of 37.01% to lead all underwriting categories between March and June this year, according to Aces Quality Management. The number surged from 23.42% in the first quarter.

Aces’ report found overall defect rates of originated mortgages rising in both the first and second quarters. 

Continue Reading

Accounting

AICPA wants SEC to reject PCAOB standard on firm and engagement metrics

Published

on

The American Institute of CPAs is asking the Securities and Exchange Commission to reject the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board’s recently adopted standard on firm and engagement metrics, arguing they would drive smaller firms out of the auditing business and affect companies large and small.

The PCAOB voted to adopt the standard last month, along with a related standard on firm reporting, but the new rules still need to be approved by the SEC before they become official and take effect. Under the new rules, PCAOB-registered public accounting firms that audit one or more issuers that qualify as an accelerated filer or large accelerated filer would be required to publicly report specified metrics relating to such audits and their audit practices. The PCAOB made some changes from the originally proposed rules to accommodate some of the objections from the audit industry and public companies, but they remain far reaching in scope. The AICPA argues that the rules would affect more than just accelerated filers and large accelerated filers and could harm smaller companies and their auditors as well. Under SEC rules, accelerated filers are companies that have a public float of between $75 million and $700 million,  annual revenues of $100 million or more, and have filed periodic reports and an annual report within the past year. Larger accelerated filers have a public float of $700 million or more. The AICPA expressed caution soon after the PCAOB voted to approve the new standards, but said it was still studying it. Now it is coming out firmly against the new rules and urging the SEC to reject them.

“Alternative approaches that better balance transparency, cost, and the needs of audit committees, while continuing to support the quality of audit services and choice of audit providers available to perform public company audits and serve the public interest should be pursued, rather than introducing potentially detrimental unproven regulations,” the AICPA said in a comment letter to the SEC.

The AICPA argues the new rules would hurt U.S. capital markets as well as the investing public, in addition to auditing firms of all sizes. 

“We believe these rules will have unintended negative consequences, including driving small and medium-sized firms out of the public company auditing practice,” said AICPA comment letter. “This would result in fewer firms performing audits which are critically important for smaller and medium size companies seeking to access the U.S. capital markets. Consequently, companies will face greater challenges and higher costs in meeting necessary audit requirements to access to the U.S. capital markets. The PCAOB acknowledges that mid-sized and smaller accounting firms serving small to mid-sized public companies will incur substantial, if not prohibitive, costs in complying with the proposed amendments. The final rules reaffirm the PCAOB’s belief that the rules will disproportionately affect smaller firms.”

The AICPA contends it’s overly simplistic to believe the impact of the rules would mostly fall within the market for large accelerated filers. “Smaller audit firms often serve clients of varying sizes, and their departure from the broader public company audit market could result in a substantial loss of audit firm options, particularly for smaller, less complex accelerated filers,” said the AICPA. “The loss of competition and the reduction in available audit firms could lead to higher costs and less favorable engagement terms for these smaller issuers. A landscape in which smaller issuers have fewer options contradicts the PCAOB’s goal of promoting fair competition.”

The AICPA disputes the claim by proponents of the new rules that competition may increase in the non-accelerated filer audit market as firms exit the accelerated filer and large accelerated filer markets. “This fails to account for the fact that non-accelerated filers often rely on firms with specific expertise and resources,” said the AICPA comment letter. “Further, the firms exiting the accelerated filer space may not be able to effectively redeploy their capacity to the non-accelerated filer market. In fact, their exit could lead to a loss of specialized services and a further concentration of resources in the larger end of audit firms, making it harder for non-accelerated filers to secure high-quality, affordable audits.”

The AICPA disagrees with predictions that profitable firms in the larger audit markets could expand their market share against the Big Four. “The resources required to absorb and integrate such capacity are substantial, and many firms may not have the operational flexibility to do so without significant strain on their existing clients and resources,” said the AICPA comment letter. “This further risks driving up audit costs for smaller and mid-sized issuers, which are often less agile and unable to absorb such change without significant disruption.”

The Institute is also concerned about the use of performance metrics within the PCAOB’s inspection and enforcement program, and how they might drive up the risk of enforcement for minor, unintentional reporting errors. It said the PCAOB rejected calls for a threshold based on the severity of reporting errors. The PCAOB declined a request for comment.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Aiwyn raises $113M in funding from KKR, Bessemer

Published

on

Aiwyn, a provider of technology solutions for accountants and CPA firms, has closed a $113 million funding round.

The money will help the company continue its evolution from its original focus on payments and collections for accounting firms into a more comprehensive tool for practice management.

Among other things, that will include building a universal client experience portal, where accountants can access all of their engagements in one place.

Justin Adams, CEO of Aiwyn

Aiwyn CEO Justin Adams

The funding will also be used to accelerate product development on both the company’s practice management platform, and on a tax solution that it is working on.

“Aiwyn is committed to empowering CPA firms to elevate their operations and client relationships,” said chairman and CEO Justin Adams, in a statement. “With this investment, we are poised to redefine how firms manage their operations from the CRM to the general ledger, while setting a new benchmark for client experiences. For too long, firms have had to decide between a legacy vendor or modern point solutions. We are proud that Aiwyn is a trusted platform for CPA firms.”

The round was led by global investment firm KKR and Bessemer Venture Partners. KKR is funding this investment primarily from its Next Generation Technology III Fund.

“The accounting industry represents a large market that has long been served by legacy players. Aiwyn is solving a clear functionality gap in the market with a solution that is easily adopted and rapidly delivers tangible enhancements to the customer experience, most noticeably through significant reductions in days sales outstanding,” said Jackson Hart, a principal on KKR’s technology growth team, in a statement.

“Aiwyn’s product suite is already quite impressive, but the company is really just getting started on its quest to deliver compelling technology to the accounting industry,” added Bessemer partner Jeremy Levine, in a statement.

Cooley LLP served as legal advisor to Aiwyn; Latham & Watkins LLP served as legal advisor to KKR; and Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP served as legal advisor to Bessemer.

Continue Reading

Trending