Owners of commercial properties, particularly office buildings, must be alert to protect themselves when entering into agreements allowing third parties to install cables and other equipment intended to provide tenants with telecommunications services.
The previous post in this series examined types of non-profit entities, both public benefit and mutual benefit organizations. This post deals more specifically with the types of public benefit organizations, commonly referred to as “501(c)(3)” organizations under the section of the Internal Revenue Code that authorizes their tax exempt status.
Various kinds of entities may be exempt from federal and state income taxes. They can be formally organized as corporations or trusts, but may be as simple as two or more people with a common purpose. Any of these organizations can apply and be recognized as exempt from tax by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”).
On March 18, 2010, President Obama signed the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act, known as the “HIRE Act” into law. The HIRE Act contains a number of provisions related to disclosure of foreign assets, a topic that has recently received a lot of focus by the Internal Revenue Service. The most touted provisions of the law, however, are designed to encourage business investment and hiring.The IRS has posted resources and forms to assist employers who seek to take advantage of the law.
n California, the Employment Development Department (“EDD”)investigates misclassification of employees and, if misclassification is found, can issue an assessment against the offending business to recover tax related withholding the employer should have paid but didn’t (including unemployment and state disability insurance payments, employment training taxes, and personal income tax) and penalties. Now, a California Court of Appeal has emphatically warned employers about the administrative steps they must follow if they intend to challenge the EDD assessment in court and seek a refund of the tax related payments.
Disputes among shareholders are common. While there may be shared objectives at the time a business incorporates, changes in the shareholders’ respective long and short term goals can change over time leading to disagreements. When this occurs, if the parties are not able to negotiate a satisfactory resolution, California corporations’ law provides certain legal mechanisms allowing or forcing the corporation to dissolve and liquidate. Using these mechanisms can involve a number of strategic implications. This is the first in a series of blogs that will summarize the general principles of voluntary and involuntary dissolution and statutory buy-out procedures.