The IRS and the ERC Mess

Congress created the Employee Retention Credit (ERC) as part of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act of 2020. The CARES Act was one of six pieces of federal legislation enacted between March 2020 and the end of 2021 designed to spend America out of the economic disaster that arose from Covid-19 and, perhaps even more so, the shutdown orders that were issued (with few exceptions) throughout the United States.

The ERC is found in Internal Revenue Code Section 3134. It was designed to provide an incentive for employers to keep their employees on the payroll, even if they were not working. The ERC is a refundable credit against employment taxes owed by employers. The law allows employers to obtain a credit of up to $7,000 per employee per quarter (capped at $21,000).

Recently, the IRS sounded the alarm concerning potentially bogus ERC claims. In July 2023, the IRS issued a news release claiming that it was looking more closely at all ERC claims. The agency is increasingly concerned that marketing by firms overstating ERC eligibility is leading to “businesses filing dubious claims.” In that news release, Commissioner Werfel stated:

The further we get from the pandemic, we believe the percentage of legitimate claims coming in is declining. Instead, we continue to see more and more questionable claims coming in following the onslaught of misleading marketing from promoters pushing businesses to apply. To address this, the IRS continues to intensify our compliance work in this area.

There was always a clear risk that this could happen. Refundable credits have long been the bane of our tax system. People wonder why the IRS targets low-income citizens for audits at a high rate. The reason is that low-income citizens are the ones who claim the earned-income tax credit (EITC). This is also a refundable credit, allowing certain low-income citizens to get more money back from the government than they paid to begin with. The Office of Management and Budget has dubbed the EITC a high-risk program because of the level of fraud associated with it.

Interestingly, the IRS does not specifically identify the nature of the ERC fraud in question. However, later news releases (discussed below) indicate that marketing companies, not tax professionals, are submitting claims for businesses that don’t qualify for the credit. To be sure, after Congress created code Section 3134 in March 2020, the law went through three amendments between then and November of 2021, at which time it was repealed retroactively, except for certain exceptions. This has created what the IRS acknowledges to be a very “complex credit with precise requirements.”

Yet complexity does not excuse the filing of a deliberately false claim, which constitutes a potential felony offense, and at the very least, carries civil penalties and interest on any required payback. It does, however, explain why taxpayers by the millions are driven into the waiting arms of professional hustlers who take advantage of the complexity of the system and the ignorance of citizens.

In September, the IRS announced an immediate moratorium through at least the end of 2023 on processing ERC claims. In issuing the moratorium, Commissioner Werfel stated:

The IRS is increasingly alarmed about honest small business owners being scammed by unscrupulous actors, and we could no longer tolerate growing evidence of questionable claims pouring in. The further we get from the pandemic, the further we see the good intentions of this important program abused. The continued aggressive marketing of these schemes is harming well-meaning businesses and delaying the payment of legitimate claims, which makes it harder to run the rest of the tax system. This harms all taxpayers, not just ERC applicants.

Werfel went on to say that:

businesses should seek out a trusted tax professional who actually understands the complex ERC rules, not a promoter or marketer hustling to get a hefty contingency fee. Businesses that receive ERC payments improperly face the daunting prospect of paying those back, so we urge the utmost caution. The moratorium will help protect taxpayers by adding a new safety net onto this program to focus on fraudulent claims and scammers taking advantage of honest taxpayers.

The IRS will continue to work claims filed prior to September 14, but it is expected that the processing time will at least double, from 90 to 180 days, and perhaps become even longer if the claim faces future review or audit. The September news release also stated that the IRS would provide guidance on how businesses may actually withdraw erroneous ERC claims without facing penalties.

That procedure was just announced. Commissioner Werfel stated:

The IRS is committed to helping small businesses and others caught up in this onslaught of Employee Retention Credit marketing. The aggressive marketing of these schemes has harmed well-meaning businesses and organizations, and some are having second thoughts about their claims. We want to give these taxpayers a way out. The withdrawal option allows employers with pending claims to avoid future problems, and we encourage them to closely review the withdrawal option and the requirements. We continue to urge taxpayers to consult with a trusted tax professional rather than a marketing company about this complex tax credit.

Note that the IRS is clear regarding deliberately bogus claims. In the September news release, the agency claims that “hundreds of criminal cases are being worked and thousands of ERC claims have been referred for audit.” The IRS goes on to say that, “Those who have willfully filed fraudulent claims or conspired to do so should be aware, however, that withdrawing a fraudulent claim will not exempt them from potential criminal investigation and prosecution.” The IRS is currently working with the Justice Department to bring cases against egregious ERC claims and promoters “who have been ignoring the rules and pushing businesses to apply.”

To illustrate that the IRS means business, the agency announced in early December that it was issuing the first round of more than 20,000 letters to businesses denying their ERC claims. The letters are going to businesses that either didn’t exist during the eligibility periods or did not have paid employees during such periods. Such businesses are what the IRS refers to as “a large block of taxpayers” who don’t qualify for the credit. Upon disallowance of the credit, the IRS will seek repayment of all improper refunds.

The key in all this, according to Werfel, is to consult “a trusted tax professional” to address potential issues. If you’re concerned about an ERC claim, consult a tax professional — not a marketing company — with experience in ERC claims as soon as possible.

Author’s note: Nothing in this article should be construed as constituting tax advice, which can be given only by a qualified professional after full and accurate disclosure of all relevant facts.

(For more from the author of “The IRS and the ERC Mess” click HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Disturbing Trend: One in Five Young Americans Express Positive Views of Osama Bin Laden

A recent survey conducted by J.L. Partners and the Daily Mail has revealed a concerning trend, with one in five young Americans expressing a positive view of Osama Bin Laden, the founder of al-Qaeda. The survey, which posed the question, “How would you describe your view of Osama Bin Laden?” highlighted stark generational differences in perceptions of the infamous terrorist responsible for the September 11 attacks.

Overall, 81 percent of respondents reported having at least somewhat negative views of Osama Bin Laden, with 76 percent holding a “completely negative view.” In contrast, eight percent of respondents expressed at least somewhat positive views, with four percent holding a “completely positive” view of Bin Laden. However, the most significant shift occurred when breaking down the results by age groups, revealing a disturbing pattern among young Americans.

Among respondents aged 18-29, 20 percent reported having at least somewhat positive views of Bin Laden, with eight percent holding a “completely positive” view. This contrasts with 52 percent of the same age group expressing at least somewhat negative views. Furthermore, 17 percent of those aged 18-29 admitted to having a “mix of positive and negative” feelings about the terrorist leader, while 11 percent claimed to “don’t know.”

The survey results underscore a growing disconnect between the younger generation and the historical reality of the September 11 attacks, as many young Americans were either born after 2001 or were too young to remember the events. The troubling findings coincide with a disturbing trend on the social media platform TikTok, where some users have been recirculating Bin Laden’s 2002 letter attempting to justify the 9/11 attacks.

Notably, eight percent of the Gen Z age group expressed positive views of both Bin Laden’s “views and actions,” while 23 percent believed his views were good but his actions were bad. Overall, 81 percent of American voters reported negative views of Bin Laden, while just under one in ten (eight percent) viewed him positively. Fourteen percent acknowledged that the terrorist leader had some “good in terms of either his views, actions, or both,” while 70 percent believed both his views and actions were bad.

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Trump Ballot Ban Appealed to U.S. Supreme Court by Colorado GOP

The Colorado Republican Party on Wednesday appealed that state’s supreme court decision that found former President Donald Trump is ineligible for the presidency, the potential first step to a showdown at the nation’s highest court over the meaning of a 155-year-old constitutional provision that bans from office those who “engaged in insurrection.”

The first impact of the appeal is to extend the stay of the 4-3 ruling from Colorado’s highest court, which put its decision on pause until Jan. 4, the day before the state’s primary ballots are due at the printer, or until an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court is finished. Trump himself has said he still plans to appeal the ruling to the nation’s highest court as well.

The U.S. Supreme Court has never ruled on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which was added after the Civil War to prevent former Confederates from returning to government. It says that anyone who swore an oath to “support” the constitution and then “engaged in insurrection” against it cannot hold government office. (Read more from “Trump Ballot Ban Appealed to U.S. Supreme Court by Colorado GOP” HERE)

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore via Flickr

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

The Data Is In: These Are the Gayest States in America

The District of Columbia has the highest percentage of LGBTQ individuals in the United States, according to a UCLA study released in December.

In the nation’s capital, 14.3% of the population claims to be part of that community, with Oregon, Delaware, Vermont and New Hampshire also topping 7% of their population identifying as LGBTQ, the study by the Williams Institute at the University of California, Los Angeles, said. The study estimated the total population of LGBTQ individuals is 13.9 million, or roughly 5.5% of the United States population, according to The Hill.

An estimated 1.55 million people in California are LGBTQ, giving it the largest population of LGBTQ individuals, the study said. Texas also has a LGBTQ population of over 1 million individuals, while Florida and New York each have over 850,000 LGBTQ people in them, the study said. Pennsylvania and Ohio each have more than 550,000 LBGTQ individuals, according to the study, with Michigan, Illinois, Georgia and Washington also reaching the top ten. (Read more from “The Data Is In: These Are the Gayest States in America” HERE)

Photo credit: Flickr

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Move Over Joseph: Nativity at Church Has Two Marys

Each Christmas season, Satanists, atheists and others with animosity toward Christianity insist on creating holiday Nativity displays with obscene subjects, goats’ heads, and the like.

This year, perhaps one of the most egregious attacks on the Christmas story actually came from a church in Italy.

There, a priest presented the Nativity with two women as the featured holy couple, leaving Joseph out of focus. . .

The presentation appeared at the Church of Saints Peter and Paul in Capocastello di Mercogliano, near Naples, the report said.

Father Vitaliano Della Sala explained his agenda:

I wanted to show with this scene that families are no longer just the traditional ones. In our parishes we see more and more children from the new types of families that exist and are part of our society, children of separated and divorced people, gay couples, single people, young mothers.

(Read more from “Move Over Joseph: Nativity at Church Has Two Marys” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Biden Sues Nation’s Largest Christian University After Hitting It With Huge Fine

The Federal Trade Commission on Wednesday announced it has sued Grand Canyon University (GCU), becoming the second agency under the Biden administration to take action against the largest Christian school in the nation within the past few months in what the university says is a coordinated attack by multiple agencies against the institution.

The FTC said in a press release it filed suit in federal court against GCU, its marketer Grand Canyon Education, Inc. and its president and CEO Brian Mueller, claiming the defendants used deceptive advertising and engaged in illegal telemarketing.

The complaint says the Arizona-based school misled prospective doctoral students about the amount of time it would take to finish its accelerated program, deceptively marketed the school as a nonprofit, and illegally called prospective students who submitted their contact information on the school’s website but requested not to be contacted. (Read more from “Biden Sues Nation’s Largest Christian University After Hitting It With Huge Fine” HERE)

Photo credit: Flickr

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Swing State’s Supreme Court Rejects Bid to Kick Trump off Primary Ballot

The Michigan Supreme Court refused a liberal group’s effort to remove Donald Trump from the 2024 presidential primary ballot on Wednesday, roughly a week after Colorado’s high court ruled against the former president in a similar case.

A brief order said the Michigan justices “are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court,” rejecting the challenge from Free Speech For The People that seeks to disqualify Trump based on the view that he engaged in an insurrection on January 6, 2021.

The application sought to challenge the Michigan Court of Appeals decision that left the issue of primary ballot access up to the Republican Party but declined to rule on whether Trump is qualified to be on the general election ballot because he has not won the GOP nomination.

One of the Michigan Supreme Court justices, Elizabeth Welch, wrote in an opinion that the lower-court ruling “still allows appellants to renew their legal efforts as to the Michigan general election later in 2024 should Trump become the Republican nominee for President of the United States or seek such office as an independent candidate.” (Read more from “Swing State’s Supreme Court Rejects Bid to Kick Trump off Primary Ballot” HERE)

Photo credit: Flickr

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Poll Reveals Financial Strain: 4 in 10 Americans Report Deteriorating Finances

A recent survey conducted by Rasmussen Reports unveils the economic concerns of Americans, with more than four in ten (41 percent) stating that their personal finances have worsened in the past six months. The findings shed light on the financial challenges faced by a significant portion of the population in Biden’s America.

According to the survey, 32 percent of respondents anticipate a further decline in their personal finances, while 25 percent expect improvement. Meanwhile, 36 percent foresee their financial conditions remaining the same. The report indicates that only 17 percent of respondents reported an improvement in their finances over the past six months, with 38 percent stating that their situations have remained relatively stable.

In terms of bill payments, the survey reveals that 28 percent of American adults have been late at least once in the past six months when making major monthly payments such as rent, mortgage, car payments, or utility bills. In contrast, 65 percent report not missing any payments during this period.

The survey highlights demographic variations in financial experiences. For instance, 25 percent of whites, 40 percent of blacks, and 28 percent of other minorities have experienced late payments on major bills in the past six months. Additionally, the report notes that adults under 40, particularly men in this age group, are more likely than their elders to have made late payments, although older Americans are more likely to report a worsening personal financial situation.

Political affiliation also plays a role in respondents’ perceptions. Democrats (26 percent) are more likely than Republicans (16 percent) and unaffiliated voters (nine percent) to state that their financial situation has improved in the past six months. However, Democrats (36 percent) are also more likely to report being late on a major payment compared to Republicans (28 percent) and unaffiliated voters (20 percent).

Married adults and those with children at home express greater concern about the future, expecting their finances to worsen in the next six months. Predictably, respondents with annual incomes above $100,000 are more likely to report improved finances, while those earning under $50,000 indicate a decline.

Photo credit: Flickr

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Biden May Face Impeachment Over ‘Conspiracy to Obstruct’ Hunter Deposition

House Republicans suggested on Wednesday that President Joe Biden could face an impeachment offense related to his son Hunter Biden‘s refusal to comply with a congressional subpoena.

Oversight Chairman James Comer (R-KY) and Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) said in a letter demanding a host of documents and communications by January 10 that their committees are “compelled to examine as part of our impeachment inquiry whether the President engaged in a conspiracy to obstruct a proceeding of Congress.”

In their letter, addressed to White House Counsel Edward Siskel, the chairmen highlighted how White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters that President Biden was “familiar” with what Hunter Biden was going to say at a mid-December press event outside the U.S. Capitol.

Hunter Biden used the Capitol Hill appearance to publicly demand House Republicans provide him a public hearing instead of appearing at the closed-door interview in compliance with the congressional subpoena issued by House Republicans. Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) told POLITICO that he reserved the spot where the First Son delivered the remarks and he appeared at the event. (Read more from “Biden May Face Impeachment Over ‘Conspiracy to Obstruct’ Hunter Deposition” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

CIA Sued Over COVID-19 Cover-up

The Oversight Project, a government watchdog affiliated with the Heritage Foundation, has taken legal action against the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), filing a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit. The lawsuit aims to force the CIA to disclose records related to its investigation into the origins of COVID-19, following allegations from a whistleblower that analysts were offered financial incentives to alter their conclusions about the virus’s origin.

The Oversight Project initiated its pursuit of CIA records after a whistleblower testified before Congress, claiming that members of the CIA’s COVID Discovery Team were provided monetary incentives to change their stance on the origins of the pandemic.

While the Energy Department and the FBI pointed to a potential lab leak in Wuhan, China, as the likely source, five other agencies suggested a natural transmission or transmission from animals through a wet market. Amidst these conflicting narratives, House investigators in September revealed that a senior-level CIA officer alleged that the agency had offered financial inducements to COVID investigators to alter their conclusions.

Representatives Brad Wenstrup and Mike Turner, chairs of the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic and Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, asserted that, according to the whistleblower, a majority of the COVID Discovery Team members believed the evidence supported the assessment that COVID-19 originated in a Wuhan laboratory.

Oversight Project Chief Counsel Kyle Brosnan expressed concern over the lack of transparency from both the CIA and the Biden administration. Brosnan stated, “A CIA whistleblower has made serious allegations that the agency bought off employees to further obstruct efforts to get to the truth of the virus’s origins. This obstruction cannot stand, and we’re fighting in federal court to get to the bottom of this.”

Photo credit: Flickr

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.