More than 150 private foundations invested with Bernard Madoff, and their losses have forced several charities to close. But the effects of this investment travesty could live on.

The IRS is looking into whether excise taxes apply to private foundations and their board members who placed up to 100% of their portfolio assets with Madoff. These taxes would be based upon the Internal Revenue Code provision that excise taxes can be assessed on a private foundation and its board for making investments that jeopardize the charitable purpose.

William Josephson, former head of New York State’s Charities Bureau, told the U.S. Senate Finance Committee that it would make public policy sense to apply to public charities some of the additional restraints that already are on private foundations. This pertains to activities such as self-dealing, excess business holdings and jeopardy investments.

Similar discussions have come up in the Senate Finance Committee in the past. And in light of the recent scandal, greater regulation of charitable organizations’ investments is likely.

The IRS has had to come up with a plan to determine how many of the 650,000 tax-exempt organizations in its master file are still in existence.  Because organizations with gross receipts under $25,000 aren’t required to file, the IRS isn’t sure which charities are still in existence but under the filing threshold and which charities are nonexistent. To help clean up their master file, charities that normally have annual gross receipts under $25,000 were required to file Form 990-N (the E-postcard) with the IRS starting in 2008, according to the Pension Protection Act of 2006.

GuideStar, a provider of nonprofit information, predicts that approximately half a million nonprofit organizations could lose their tax-exempt status on May 15, 2010, due to lack of filing the 990-N. Although no penalties are assessed for filing the 990-N late, the IRS states that organizations will lose their tax-exempt status if they fail to file for three consecutive years (that is, 2008, 2009 and 2010). Once an organization loses its tax-exempt status, it must reapply and pay the user fees to have its tax-exempt status reinstated.

If you sponsor a 403(b) plan, you now have a little more time to get a written policy in place. When 403(b) plan regulations were finalized in July 2007, plan sponsors were required to put in place a written plan of the requirements by Jan. 1, 2009.

The IRS now says it will not treat a 403(b) plan as failing to meet the requirements if the plan’s sponsor adopts a written plan intended to satisfy the regulations on or before Dec. 31, 2009, as long as the sponsor operates the plan with a reasonable interpretation of the final regulations during all of this year.

Also, before year end, you must make your best efforts to retroactively correct any operational nonconformity to the written plan, such as doing catch-up contributions.

The IRS is continuing its education and enforcement program on political campaign activities by nonprofits. It’s reminding charities that, as the Internal Revenue Code states, they aren’t allowed to participate in, or intervene in, any political campaigning on behalf of, or in opposition to, any candidate in public office. Nonprofit organizations, other than charities, that participate in political campaign activities should discuss the activities with their accountants to ensure that all of the organization’s filing requirements for the political activity, if any, are being met.

What’s the best way to hold a real estate title? The wrong ownership form can increase legal liability, enlarge your tax burden, and subject an estate to probate. In contrast, choosing the right ownership form can reduce red tape while improving a property’s profitability. This article discusses the different options and who might benefit the most in each case. A sidebar looks at living trusts as a means of holding titles to personal residences and other major assets.

(Click here to continue reading this article.)

As the weak economy continues, real estate investors are taking a hard look at ways to maximize the profitability of property management. While some developers delve into management themselves, others are focusing their search on streamlined processes and cost-cutting measures. Fortunately, smart strategies exist that can help to achieve these goals. Two of the best: finding a good property manager and using Web-based property management software.

(Click here to continue reading this article.)

As the green building movement continues to take center stage, so do green leases. Through a green lease, landlords and tenants are “bound” to help ensure that high-performance buildings meet and exceed their intended “green” goals. Although specifications vary, a number of characteristics are emerging as likely components in green leases, such as alignment with a third party certification standard such as LEED, BRREAM, Energy Star or Green Globes. But developers who jump through all the LEED or other building certification hoops likely won’t want that certification jeopardized by noncompliant leasehold improvements – so rules defining sustainable product requirements and construction practices should be clearly specified in a tenant construction agreement.

(Click here to continue reading this article.)

In recent weeks there have been faint rumblings of recovery in the U.S. economy, but some economists are cautious about saying the recovery is nigh. In their view, the jury is still out about the benefits of the administration’s stimulus package. They also expect state and local governments to lag in joining the rebound.

(Click here to continue reading this article.)

from the Government NOW e-Newsletter

Governmental entities have received a reprieve from implementing proposed IRS regulations. On December 5, 2008, the IRS proposed IRC subsection 3402(t). Under this regulation, payments exceeding $10,000 made by a government entity for goods and services, to contractors, would be subject to a 3% withholding. The Recovery Act extended the effective date to December 31, 2011. All federal, state, and political subdivisions of state governments are subject to this regulation. If the government entity fails to withhold the tax required, it becomes liable for the payment of tax. However, there are various exceptions. ASBS No. 54 changes the reporting requirements and fund balance definitions that we are used to seeing in governmental funds.  Non-spendable fund balances will be specifically identified and all other amounts will be classified according to the new restriction hierarchy shown below. To find out more, please click here.

from the Government NOW e-Newsletter

GASBS No. 54 changes the reporting requirements and fund balance definitions that we are used to seeing in governmental funds.  Non-spendable fund balances will be specifically identified and all other amounts will be classified according to the new restriction hierarchy shown below.

Nonspendable Fund Balance.  These are amounts that cannot be spent and are, therefore not included in the current year appropriation. There are two components to this fund balance category: 1) not in spendable form and 2) legally or contractually required to be maintained intact. The “not in spendable form’ component refers to previously recorded disbursements and includes items that are not expected to be converted into cash, such as inventories on hand and prepaid expenditures. Also included would be the long-term amount of loans and notes receivable and property acquired for resale.