Heiress Huguette Clark, who was born in 1906 and died last May at 104, was America’s last living link to the 1890s “Gilded Age.” Her father, William A. Clark, was Montana’s “Copper King” and, according to her New York Times obituary, “once bought himself a United States Senate seat as casually as another man might buy a pair of shoes.” Huguette grew up in a 121-room mansion, at the corner of New York’s Fifth Avenue and 77th Street, that cost three times as much as Yankee Stadium. But her life soon took an odd turn. She married, for just a year at age 22, then got a quickie Reno divorce. (Her husand claimed they never even consummated the marriage.) Then she and her mother withdrew almost completely from view. The last known photograph of her was taken in 1930, and she rarely appeared in public after her mother’s death in 1963.

Clark may have been shy, but she was no miser. She spent most of her life in a 42-room coop at Fifth Avenue and 72nd Street, said to be the largest parkview apartment in the city, and worth an estimated $100 million. (She left in an ambulance in 1988 and never came back.) She owned a 21,666-square-foot mansion called “Bellosguardo,” or “lovely view,” on 23 acres overlooking the Pacific in Santa Barbara, CA. (She stopped visiting sometime in the 1950s, and reportedly turned down a $100 million offer to sell it to Beanie Baby founder Ty Warner.) And in 1952, she bought a 22-room mansion on 52 acres in New Canaan, CT. (She added a new wing to the house and hired caretakers to live on the grounds — but never spent a single night there herself.)

Huguette had so little contact with the world that some people wondered if she was actually still alive. It turns out she spent her last 22 years in a series of ordinary rooms at New York hospitals. She had few visitors during this time, and little contact with anyone outside these facilities. But her few contacts included her attorney, Wally Bock, and her accountant, Irving Kamsler. And that’s where Clark’s Gilded Age story begins to tarnish.

Clark was worth half a billion dollars at her death. She left the bulk of her fortune to charity, with smaller bequests to her longtime nurse ($30 million), her goddaughter ($12 million), and her attorney and accountant ($500,000 each). You would think she’d be able to pay her taxes, right? But property records show the IRS filed four liens for unpaid taxes — $1 million in 2006, $1.1 million and $41,000 in 2007, and $7,400 in 2008. Even worse, according to a Probate Court filing, the pair had let unpaid federal gift taxes and penalties accrue — to the tune of $90 million!

It turns out both the attorney Bock and accountant Kamsler have a history of questionable conduct. When Bock’s former law parter Donald Wallace died, after revising his will six times in the last few years of his life, Bock and Kamsler wound up inheriting $100,000 in cash each — plus Wallace’s Mercedes and his Upper East Side apartment. They even collected $368,000 in fees on the $4 million estate! And, just by the way, Kamsler is also a convicted felon and registered sex offender, who pled guilty in 2007 to attempting to disseminate indecent material to minors in an online “chat room.”

As Huguette Clark’s bizarre story reminds us, money really can’t buy happiness. Our job, of course, is to help you pay the minimum tax allowed by law. But before you ask us what we can do to help you pay less, ask yourself how those savings will improve your life. Are you working to put your children through college? Build security for your retirement? Or are you looking for life’s little “extras,” like traveling in style? Those are the real benefits we work to give you — not just numbers on your annual IRS “scorecard”!

The outlaw Willie Sutton stole an estimated $2 million over a 40-year career robbing banks — and scored the ultimate “success” in his business, living long enough to die of natural causes. Sutton always carried a pistol or Tommy gun with him on jobs, declaring “you can’t rob a bank on charm and personality.” But the gun was never loaded, because, as he said, someone might have gotten hurt! And he became legendary, ironically, for something he never actually said. According to the story, Sutton was asked why he robbed banks — and replied “because that’s where the money is.” But in his 1976 autobiography, Where the Money Was: The Memoirs of a Bank Robber, he confessed that credit for the line belongs to “some enterprising reporter who apparently felt a need to fill out his copy.”

What does a depression-era bank robber have to do with taxes? Well, the IRS estimates that outlaw taxpayers cost the Treasury $385 billion per year in uncollected taxes — roughly 15% of the amount they believe is due under current law. So they work hard to close that gap. In FY 2011, the IRS employed over 22,000 revenue officers, revenue agents, and special agents. They conducted 391,621 “field” audits and 1,173,069 less-intensive “correspondence” audits. They filed levies on 3.7 million taxpayers and filed over a million liens. But they can’t turn over every rock. So how do they case their targets?
Earlier this month, the IRS released their FY 2011 Enforcement and Service Results revealing how likely you are to be audited. And even Willie Sutton would have appreciated the IRS’s “M.O.”:

• If you make less than $200,000, your overall audit risk is only about one in a hundred. (Of course, that average encompasses a range of possibilities. If you run a sole proprietorship in a cash-heavy business like takeout pizza, your risk may be far higher.)
• If you make over $200,000, your overall audit risk rises to about one in twenty-five. Obviously, the IRS sees more opportunity in chasing higher income earners.
• If you pull down over $1 million, your audit risk rises again to one in eight. Welcome to the 1%!

The IRS likes targeting entertainers, athletes, and other celebrities, too. Sure, it sets a high-profile example for the rest of us. But it’s also (spoiler alert) where the money is. Take Hollywood trainwreck Lindsay Lohan, for example. Google her name, and you’ll usually find it followed by “failed another breathalyzer test” or “missed her court-appointed community service.” But last week, Lohan made a different kind of headline. That’s right, the IRS filed a lien against her home seeking $93,701.57 in unpaid taxes from 2009.

Where does that all leave us as we move into this year’s tax season? Our job is to help you pay the minimum tax allowed by law. But we know the IRS is out to challenge us. So we don’t cut corners. We give you good, solid planning. That way, even if you do lose the “audit lottery,” you’ll feel safe knowing your savings are court-tested and IRS-approved.

The IRS is busy playing detective! But are they building cases, clue by meticulous clue, like the supersleuths of television’s CSI? Or are they falling on their faces like the bumbling Inspector Clouseau?

Last month, a federal judge gave the IRS permission to serve a “John Doe” summons on the California Board of Equalization, demanding names of residents who transferred real estate to children or grandchildren for little or no consideration. The IRS sought the names as part of a nationwide effort to find taxpayers who transfer property to relatives without filing gift tax returns. (The IRS had already rounded up information from Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Washington state and Wisconsin — but California officials objected that state law prohibited them from ratting out residents without court approval.)

Most people don’t know much about gift tax, for the simple reason that most people won’t ever pay gift tax. Gift tax law lets you give up to $13,000 per year to as many people as you like. Once your gifts to any single person (other than your spouse) top $13,000 in a year, you’re required to file gift tax returns. Your cumulative lifetime gifts count against your estate tax “unified credit,” which is the amount you’re allowed to leave free of estate tax. And once your cumulative lifetime gifts top $5,012,000, you owe a 35% tax on the excess. If you’re gifting to a grandchild or some other person more than one generation removed, you might even owe an extra 35% “generation-skipping” tax.

How does that lead the IRS to combing state property records like a sleazy private investigator tracking down a cheating husband? Well, transferring property into an heir’s name is a common estate-planning move. Let’s say you own a beloved vacation home, or a stock portfolio, and you don’t want to see it burdened by probate. You can just add your child’s name to the deed or account as “joint tenant with right of survivorship,” and at your death, voila, the property automatically passes to your child. But there’s a catch — transferring property like that counts as a “complete gift.” If that property is worth $1,000,000, you’ve just made a $500,000 gift!

This particular IRS “project” is already yielding results. The IRS filed an affidavit in the California case stating that they had examined 658 taxpayers who transferred property to relatives — and concluded that 238 of them should have filed Form 709 to report the gift. Twenty of those 238 were assessed actual tax because the transfers pushed them over their lifetime exemption.

This isn’t the first time the IRS has used the “John Doe” summons to flush out members of suspect groups. Back in 2002, the IRS subpoenaed MasterCard and Visa to find taxpayers using debit cards tied to accounts in offshore tax havens. And in 2008, they used it to find taxpayers hiding Swiss bank accounts. The Internal Revenue Manual puts strict limits on this tool. But if today’s efforts succeed in finding lost revenue, we can probably expect to see more in the future.

There are a couple of lessons here. First, many financial moves — like transferring property into your kids’ names — have hidden tax consequences that are easy to miss. And second, the IRS has more ways than you realize to find those consequences. So don’t take chances, especially when they might land you on the wrong end of an IRS subpoena! You know how the utility company tells you to “call before you dig”? Well, call us before you dig, and we’ll help you avoid all sorts of nasty surprises!

If you employ people in the State of South Carolina, make sure you are aware of the E-Verify requirements that went into effect on January 1, 2012. Below is a copy of the notice from the South Carolina Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation.

NOTICE TO ALL SOUTH CAROLINA EMPLOYERS:

You Must Verify All New Hires through E-Verify Effective January 1, 2012

Amendments to the “South Carolina Illegal Immigration and Reform Act” were signed into law by Governor Nikki Haley on June 27, 2011. The amended law requires all employers to enroll in the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s E-Verify system beginning January 1, 2012 and to verify the legal status of all new employees through E-Verify within three business days. Failure to enroll in and use E-Verify to verify new hires will result in probation for the employer or suspension/revocation of the employer’s business licenses.

Verification Requirements

In addition to completing and maintaining the federal employment eligibility verification form, more commonly known as the Form I-9, all South Carolina employers must within three business days after employing a new employee:

1. Verify the employee’s work authorization through the E-Verify federal work authorization program administered by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

2. Employers may no longer confirm a new employee’s employment authorization with a driver’s license or state identification card.

E-Verify

E-Verify is a free Internet-based system maintained by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. E-Verify compares the information an employee provides on Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, against millions of government records maintained by the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration. The database generally provides results in three to five seconds. If the information matches, the employee is eligible to work in the United States. If there’s a mismatch, E-Verify will alert the employer and the employee will be allowed to work while he or she resolves the problem. To enroll in E-Verify, go to www.dhs.gov/e-verify.

License

Under the law, all private employers in South Carolina are imputed a South Carolina employment license which permits a private employer to employ a person in the state. A private employer may not employ a person unless the private employer’s South Carolina employment license and any other applicable licenses as defined in Section 41-8-10 are in effect and are not suspended or revoked. Under Section 41-8-10, a “license” means an agency permit, certificate, approval, registration, charter, or similar form of authorization that is required by law and that is issued by any agency political subdivision of the state for the purpose of operating a business in the state. Professional licenses are excluded, but “license” includes employment licenses, articles of organization, articles of incorporation, a certificate of partnership, a partnership registration, a certificate to transact business, or similar forms of authorization issued by the South Carolina Secretary of State, and any transaction privilege tax license.

Employment of Unauthorized Alien Prohibited

Section 41-8-30 provides that a private employer who knowingly or intentionally employs an unauthorized alien violates the private employer’s licenses.

Enforcement

The South Carolina Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation (LLR) is charged with investigating complaints and conducting random audits of private employers to assure compliance. The agency must: (1) notify the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) of suspected unauthorized aliens employed by a private employer; and (2) notify state and local law enforcement agencies responsible for enforcing state immigration laws.

Failure to Comply

For a first occurrence by a private employer, prior to July 1, 2012, of failure to verify a new hire through the E-Verify federal work authorization program within three business days, an employer must swear or affirm in writing to the South Carolina Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation that the employer has complied with the provisions of the federal law covering employment of unauthorized aliens (8 U.S.C. Section 1324a) from January 1, 2012 until notification by LLR of a violation, and comply with the state law on verification of new hires within three business days.

For a first occurrence by a private employer, after July 1, 2012, of failure to verify a new hire through the E-Verify federal work authorization program within three business days, the Department of LLR must place the employer on probation for a period of one year, during which time the private employer must submit quarterly reports to the agency demonstrating compliance with the law. A subsequent violation within three years of the law’s verification requirements must result in the suspension of the private employer’s licenses for at least 10 days but not more than 30 days.

A private employer who knowingly or intentionally employs an unauthorized alien must have his licenses suspended by the Department of LLR on a first occurrence for at least 10 days but not more than 30 days. During the period of suspension, the private employer may not engage in business, open to the public, employ an employee, or otherwise operate. The private employer’s licenses are reinstated when the employer demonstrates that the unauthorized alien has been terminated, and pays a reinstatement fee equal to the cost of investigating and enforcing the matter, not to exceed $1,000. For a second occurrence, the employer’s licenses must be suspended for at least 30 days but not more than 60 days. Following a third occurrence, the private employer’s licenses are revoked.