Showing posts with label 412(i). Show all posts

IRS Criminal Investigation Department Audits Section 79, Captive Insurance, 412i and 419 Scams - HG.org

Small Business Retirement Plans Fuel Litigation

Maryland Trial Lawyer

Dolan Media Newswires January

Small businesses facing audits and potentially huge tax penalties over certain types of retirement plans are filing lawsuits against those who marketed, designed and sold the plans. The 412(i) and 419(e) plans were marketed in the past several years as a way for small business owners to set up retirement or welfare benefits plans while leveraging huge tax savings, but the IRS put them on a list of abusive tax shelters and has more recently focused audits on them.
The penalties for such transactions are extremely high and can pile up quickly.
There are business owners who owe taxes but have been assessed 2 million in penalties. The existing cases involve many types of businesses, including doctors’ offices, dental practices, grocery store owners, mortgage companies and restaurant owners. Some are trying to negotiate with the IRS. Others are not waiting. A class action has been filed and cases in several states are ongoing. The business owners claim that they were targeted by insurance companies; and their agents to purchase the plans without any disclosure that the IRS viewed the plans as abusive tax shelters. Other defendants include financial advisors who recommended the plans, accountants who failed to fill out required tax forms and law firms that drafted opinion letters legitimizing the plans, which were used as marketing tools.
A 412(i) plan is a form of defined benefit pension plan. A 419(e) plan is a similar type of health and benefits plan. Typically, these were sold to small, privately held businesses with fewer than 20 employees and several million dollars in gross revenues. What distinguished a legitimate plan from the plans at issue were the life insurance policies used to fund them. The employer would make large cash contributions in the form of insurance premiums, deducting the entire amounts. The insurance policy was designed to have a “springing cash value,” meaning that for the first 5-7 years it would have a near-zero cash value, and then spring up in value.
Just before it sprung, the owner would purchase the policy from the trust at the low cash value, thus making a tax-free transaction. After the cash value shot up, the owner could take tax-free loans against it. Meanwhile, the insurance agents collected exorbitant commissions on the premiums – 80 to 110 percent of the first year’s premium, which could exceed million.
Technically, the IRS’s problems with the plans were that the “springing cash” structure disqualified them from being 412(i) plans and that the premiums, which dwarfed any payout to a beneficiary, violated incidental death benefit rules.
Under §6707A of the Internal Revenue Code, once the IRS flags something as an abusive tax shelter, or “listed transaction,” penalties are imposed per year for each failure to disclose it. Another allegation is that businesses weren’t told that they had to file Form 8886, which discloses a listed transaction.
According to Lance Wallach of Plainview, N.Y. (516-938-5007), who testifies as an expert in cases involving the plans, the vast majority of accountants either did not file the forms for their clients or did not fill them out correctly.
Because the IRS did not begin to focus audits on these types of plans until some years after they became listed transactions, the penalties have already stacked up by the time of the audits.
Another reason plaintiffs are going to court is that there are few alternatives – the penalties are not appeasable and must be paid before filing an administrative claim for a refund.
The suits allege misrepresentation, fraud and other consumer claims. “In street language, they lied,” said Peter Losavio, a plaintiffs’ attorney in Baton Rouge, La., who is investigating several cases. So far they have had mixed results. Losavio said that the strength of an individual case would depend on the disclosures made and what the sellers knew or should have known about the risks.
In 2004, the IRS issued notices and revenue rulings indicating that the plans were listed transactions. But plaintiffs’ lawyers allege that there were earlier signs that the plans ran afoul of the tax laws, evidenced by the fact that the IRS is auditing plans that existed before 2004.
“Insurance companies were aware this was dancing a tightrope,” said William Noll, a tax attorney in Malvern, Pa. “These plans were being scrutinized by the IRS at the same time they were being promoted, but there wasn’t any disclosure of the scrutiny to unwitting customers.”
A defense attorney, who represents benefits professionals in pending lawsuits, said the main defense is that the plans complied with the regulations at the time and that “nobody can predict the future.”
An employee benefits attorney who has settled several cases against insurance companies, said that although the lost tax benefit is not recoverable, other damages include the hefty commissions – which in one of his cases amounted to 400,000 the first year – as well as the costs of handling the audit and filing amended tax returns.
Defying the individualized approach an attorney filed a class action in federal court against four insurance companies claiming that they were aware that since the 1980s the IRS had been calling the policies potentially abusive and that in 2002 the IRS gave lectures calling the plans not just abusive but “criminal.” A judge dismissed the case against one of the insurers that sold 412(i) plans.
The court said that the plaintiffs failed to show the statements made by the insurance companies were fraudulent at the time they were made, because IRS statements prior to the revenue rulings indicated that the agency may or may not take the position that the plans were abusive. The attorney, whose suit also names law firm for its opinion letters approving the plans, will appeal the dismissal to the 5th Circuit.
In a case that survived a similar motion to dismiss, a small business owner is suing Hartford Insurance to recover a “seven-figure” sum in penalties and fees paid to the IRS. A trial is expected in August.
But tax experts say the audits and penalties continue. “There’s a bit of a disconnect between what members of Congress thought they meant by suspending collection and what is happening in practice. Clients are still getting bills and threats of liens,” Wallach said. “Thousands of business owners are being hit with million-dollar-plus fines. … The audits are continuing and escalating. I just got four calls today,” he said. A bill has been introduced in Congress to make the penalties less draconian, but nobody is expecting a magic bullet.
“From what we know, Congress is looking to make the penalties more proportionate to the tax benefit received instead of a fixed amount.”
Lance Wallach can be reached at: WallachInc@gmail.com
For more information, please visit www.taxadvisorexperts.org Lance Wallach, National Society of Accountants Speaker of the Year and member of the AICPA faculty of teaching professionals, is a frequent speaker on retirement plans, abusive tax shelters, financial, international tax, and estate planning. He writes about 412(i), 419, Section79, FBAR, and captive insurance plans. He speaks at more than ten conventions annually, writes for over fifty publications, is quoted regularly in the press and has been featured on television and radio financial talk shows including NBC, National Pubic Radio’s All Things Considered, and others. Lance has written numerous books including Protecting Clients from Fraud, Incompetence and Scams published by John Wiley and Sons, Bisk Education’s CPA’s Guide to Life Insurance and Federal Estate and Gift Taxation, as well as the AICPA best-selling books, including Avoiding Circular 230 Malpractice Traps and Common Abusive Small Business Hot Spots. He does expert witness testimony and has never lost a case. Contact him at 516.938.5007, wallachinc@gmail.com or visit www.taxadvisorexperts.com.

Lance Wallach
68 Keswick Lane
Plainview, NY 11803
Ph.: (516)938-5007
Fax: (516)938-6330 www.vebaplan.com

National Society of Accountants Speaker of The Year

The information provided herein is not intended as legal, accounting, financial or any type of advice for any specific individual or other entity. You should contact an appropriate professional for any such advice.

Sid Kess’ Practical Alternatives to Commonly Misused and Abused

What's new in CPE self-study for April 2008

New and Bestselling AICPA CPE Self-Study Courses
At the AICPA Store you'll find more than 200 titles in a variety of formats to best meet your needs. Get practical guidance. Stay up-to-date on hot topics. Train your staff. Meet CPE reporting deadlines. Get real-time exam results with online grading. Check out this month's picks below. Turn to the AICPA for quality, value and convenience in CPE self-study products. Order today.

Author/Moderator: Lance Wallach, CLU, CHFC, CIMC
Publisher: AICPA
Availability: In Stock

A perfect follow-up to “Avoiding Circular 230 Malpractice Traps and Common Abusive Small Business Hot Spots,” this course was created by the renowned Sid Kess. Learn the best strategies for reducing taxes and building, conserving and passing wealth to the next generation while at the same time avoiding abusive strategies.

Objectives:
Identify practical alternatives to abusive tax shelters
Understand how to integrate financial products as part of a retirement plan
Discover how to use innovative retirement and financial programs to improve business and personal financial wealth of your clients
Optimize your value in the planning process between your clients and their financial advisors
Prerequisite: None
Accepted for CFP® credit.

Chapter 1 - Planning for Business Owners Learning Objectives
Introduction
Building the Perfect Retirement Plan
SEP IRA: The Good
SEP IRA: The Bad
SEP IRA: The Ugly
The K
The Double K
Defined Benefit Plans
Adding Survivor Benefits
412(i) Defined Benefit Plan
Cash Balance Plans
VEBAs and 419 Plans
Taxability of Trust Net Income
Taxability of Excess Benefits
Group-Term Life Insurance Plan
Post-Retirement Medical Benefit
Voluntary Employees Beneficiary Association (VEBA) - Commentary
New Development - Welfare Benefit Plans under Section 419(e)
Executive Carve Out Long-Term Care
What Is Long-Term Care?
How Much Does It Cost
Benefits of Long-Term Care Insurance to Employees
Benefits of Long-Term Care Insurance to Employers
Executive Carve Out Long-Term Care
Taxability
Long-Term Care Insurance Premium Deductibility
2007 Eligible Long-Term Care Insurance Premiums Age-Based Deduction Limits

Chapter 2 - Personal Financial PlanningLearning Objectives
Introduction
IRA Planning
RMDs
Stretch IRA
Stretch IRA Example
Stretch IRA Pitfalls
Other Beneficiary Pitfalls
Important Questions Your Client Should Ask Their IRA Custodian
When a Stretch IRA Might Not Make Sense
Taxable Estate
Company Stock
What Investments Should be In Your Client's IRA?
Estate Planning
What Makes a Good Estate Plan?
Minimizing Taxes
Gift Taxes
Generation Skipping Tax (GST)
Estate Division
Insurance Trusts
Pay Estate Taxes at a Discount
Estate Planning Mistakes of the Rich and Famous
Unintended Heirs
Estate Tax Problems
Incapacity
Leaving Money Outright to Children
Pension Plan Beneficiary Problems
Premium Financing as a Tool to Pay Life Insurance Premiums
The Benefits of Premium Financing
Type of Premium Financing Arrangements
Collateral
Interest Rate Risk
General Account Universal Life
Variable Life Insurance
Single Index Life
Multiple Index Life
Premium Financing Components
Loan Options
Process
Repaying Premium Loans
Income Tax Considerations
Gift Tax Considerations
Estate Tax Considerations
Premium Finance Due Diligence
Life Settlements
Life Settlement History
The Life Settlement Market
Life Settlement Case Studies
The Insurance Swapout Process(TM)
Reasons for Using an ISP
Why You Would Not Want to Use an ISP
Important Considerations
Annuities
Types of Annuities
Non-Qualified Funds in a Tax Deferred Annuity
Surrender Charges
Tax Rules
Sales Abuses
Risks
Annuity Checklist

Chapter 3 - Advanced PlanningLearning Objectives
Introduction
Hedge Funds
Availability
Hedge Fund Risks and Disadvantages
Hedge Fund Advantages
Hedge Fund Investing Styles
Relative Value
Event Driven
Long/Short
Tactical Trading
Due Diligence
Returns
Risks
Diversification
Hedge Fund of Funds
Mutual Funds That Follow Hedge Fund Strategies
Tax Implications
Private Placement Variable Universal Life Insurance
Why High Net Worth Investors Use Hedge Funds
Taxation of Life Insurance
PPVUL
Prospect Profile
Practitioner Beware
Conclusion
International Mortgages
How it Works
Loan Features
Other Considerations
Costs
Risks
Frequently Asked Questions

Chapter 4 - Health Insurance Planning
Learning Objectives
Introduction
Health Insurance Basics
Health Savings Accounts
Health Reimbursement Arrangements
Other Health Insurance Arrangements
Self-Funded Plans and Stop-Loss
Limited Coverage and Supplemental Plans
Conclusion
Appendix A - Qualified Medical Expenses - Distributions from an HSA
Appendix B - Health Savings Accounts - Preventive Care, Safe Harbor
Appendix C - Sample Sections of an Actual Health Reimbursement Arrangement Summary Plan Document

Chapter 5 - Ethics Focus: Taxation
Ethics Overview
Recent Developments
Spotlight on Independence in Tax Services
Key Ethical Dilemmas and Judgment Calls
Addressing Ethical Dilemmas
Available Resources

Chapter 6 - Latest Developments733730

IRS Attacks Business Owners in 419, 412, Section 79 and Captive Insurance Plans Under Section 6707A

Class Action Challenges Propriety of 412(e)(3) Annuities for ERISA Defined Benefit Plans

Insurance Class Action Defense and ERISA Litigation
On August 1, 2012, a putative class action lawsuit was filed in the District of Connecticut challenging the propriety of certain insurance contracts used to fund defined benefit plans described in section 412(e)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. U.S. Telemanagement, Inc. v. Fidelity Security Life Insurance Co. et al., No. 3:12-cv-1110 JBA (D. Conn.). Because we perceive that the complaint is attacking the appropriateness of the product, as well as the specifics of the product that the named defendant sold, it is a lawsuit that potentially could have industry-wide implications. In addition, as plaintiffs in some of the ERISA revenue-sharing lawsuits have attempted to do, the complaint alleges that the insurance company that sold the annuities acted as an ERISA fiduciary of the plans. This lawsuit thus extends the attack on insurance companies, as seen in the revenue-sharing class actions, that attempts to convert service providers into fiduciaries.

412(e)(3) Plans and Annuities
A 412(e)(3) plan is a tax-qualified, defined benefit pension plan that is funded with either annuities or a combination of annuities and life insurance. These sorts of plans are most often funded through annuities, and those annuities have come to be known as 412(e)(3) annuities, because of the section of the Internal Revenue Code that authorizes this sort of plan. Such 412(e)(3) plans are normally marketed to small businesses as vehicles that can provide large income tax deductions in connection with the establishment or continued funding of a pension plan. The annuities used to fund such a plan often are priced upon low assumed rates of return and other actuarial factors, which means that the employer is required to contribute a larger amount of money up front to fund the plan, and that in turn provides employers with larger tax deductions for their business.

Section 79 Plans: December 2013

ABUSIVE RETIREMENTT PLANS

http://www.journalofaccountancy.com/Issues/2008/Sep/Abusive+Insurance+and+Retirement+Plans.htm

Don't Become A "Material Advisor"

Lance Wallach - The Nation's Foremost 419 and 412i plans expert

Why You Should Not Own Mutual Funds

IRS Targets 412(i) Plans The ERISA Audit Bulletin The IRS is aggressively…

Section 79 Plans: 419, 412i, Captive And Section 79 Plans Continue To Draw IRS Attention.

Reportable Transactions .com: Life Insurance, Listed, Abusive, IRS, Audits. 419 ...

419 Welfare Benefit Plans - HGExperts.com

Desperate Problem? Use Experts in Finance, Accounting, Law, and Taxes

ACI 7th National Forum on ERISA Litigation - April 28-29, Chicago

IRS fines material advisors YOU

Started by VEBAPLAN , Nov 23 2010 03:39 PM

This topic is locked

2 replies to this topic

#1 VEBAPLAN

Registered User

Registered
96 posts

Posted 23 November 2010 - 03:39 PM

Material advisors who make a tax statement on or after November 2, 2006, with respect to transactions entered into on or after November 2, 2006, have disclosure and list maintenance obligations under sections 6111 and 6112. Persons required to disclose these transactions and/or maintain lists of advisees who fail to do so may be subject to the penalties under sections 6707A, 6707, 6708, 6662, and/or 6662A
For those of you that deal with 419, captives, abusive 412i and section 79 scams YOU should file. Lance Wallach

Lance Wallach, CLU, ChFC, CIMC, speaks and writes extensively about VEBAs, retirement plans, and tax reduction strategies. He speaks at more than 50 national conventions annually and writes for more than 30 publications. For more information and additional articles on these subjects, visit www.vebaplan.com or call 516-938-5007.

#2 VEBAPLAN

Registered User

Registered
96 posts

Posted 09 December 2010 - 01:40 PM

Post #11

Registered User

Group: Registered
Posts: 588
Joined: 10-May 08
From: Unless expressly stated otherwise, 1) nothing contained in this post was written or intended to be used, and may not be used or relied upon by any taxpayer for the purposes of avoiding penalties that
Member No.: 26,888

Analysis

Here it is. Here is proof of my predictions. Perhaps you didn’t believe me when I told you the IRS was coming after what it has deemed “abusive transactions,” but here is the proof; right from the IRS’s own job posting. If you were involved with a 419e, 412i, listed transaction, abusive tax shelter, Section 79, or captive, and you haven’t yet approached an expert for help with your situation, you had better do it now, before the notices start piling up on your desk.

The exact announcement from the Department of the Treasury:

Job Title: INTERNAL REVENUE AGENT (ABUSIVE TRANSACTIONS GROUP)
Agency: Internal Revenue Service
Open Period: Monday, October 18, 2010 to Monday, November 01, 2010
Sub Agency: Internal Revenue Service
Job Announcement Number: 11PH1-SBB0058-0512-12/13

Who May Be Considered:

IRS employees on Career or Career Conditional Appointments in the competitive service
Treasury Office of Chief Counsel employees on Career or Career Conditional Appointments or with prior competitive status
IRS employees on Term Appointments with potential conversion to a Career or Career Conditional Appointment in the same line of work
According to the job description, the agents of the Abusive Transactions Group will be conducting examinations of individuals, sole proprietorships, small corporations, partnerships and fiduciaries. They will be examining tax returns and will “determine the correct tax liability, and identify situations with potential for understated taxes.”

These agents will work in the Small Business/Self Employed Business Division (SB/SE) which provides examinations for about 7 million small businesses and upwards of 33 million self-employed and supplemental income taxpayers. This group specifically goes after taxpayers who generally have higher incomes than most taxpayers, need to file more tax forms, and generally need to rely more on paid tax preparers.” Their examinations can contain “special audit features or anticipated accounting, tax law, or investigative issues,” and look to make sure that, for example, specialty returns are filed properly.

The fines are severe. Under IRC 6707A, fines are up to $200,000 annually for not properly disclosing participation in a listed transaction. There was a moratorium on those fines until June 2010, pending new legislation to reduce them, but the new law virtually guarantees you will be fined. The fines had been $200,000 per year on the corporate level and $100,000 per year on the personal level. You got the fine even if you made no contributions for the year. All you had to do was to be in the plan and fail to properly disclose your participation.

You can possibly still avoid all this by properly filing Form 8886 IMMEDIATELY with the IRS. Time is especially of the essence now. You MUST file before you are assessed the penalty. For months the Service has been holding off on actually collecting from people that they assessed because they did not know what Congress was going to do. But now they do know, so they are going to move aggressively to collection with people they have already assessed. There is no reason not to now. This is especially true because the new legislation still does not provide for a right of appeal or judicial review. The Service is still judge, jury, and executioner. Its word is absolute as far as determining what is a listed transaction.

So you have to file Form 8886 fast, but you also have to file it properly. The Service treats forms that are incorrectly filed as if they were never filed. You get fined for filing incorrectly, or for not filing at all. The Statute of Limitations does not begin unless you properly file. That means IRS can come back to get you any time in the future unless you file properly.
If you don’t want these new IRS Agents, or any other IRS agents for that matter, to be earning their paychecks by coming after you, make sure you have done all you can to ensure that you have filed properly by reaching out for expert help today.

Lance Wallach, National Society of Accountants Speaker of the Year and member of the AICPA faculty of teaching professionals, is a frequent speaker on retirement plans, financial and estate planning, and abusive tax shelters. He writes about 412(i), 419, and captive insurance plans. He gives expert witness testimony and his side has never lost a case. For more information visit www.taxadvisorexperts.org or www.taxaudit419.com.

The information provided herein is not intended as legal, accounting, financial or any other type of advice for any specific individual or other entity. You should contact an appropriate professional for any such advice

#3 VEBAPLAN

Registered User

Registered
96 posts

Posted 23 December 2010 - 10:06 AM

Dolan Media Newswires 01/22/2010

Small business retirement plans fuel litigation
Small businesses facing audits and potentially huge tax penalties over certain types of retirement plans are filing lawsuits against those who marketed, designed and sold the plans. The 412(i) and 419(e) plans were marketed in the past several years as a way for small business owners to set up retirement or welfare benefits plans while leveraging huge tax savings, but the IRS put them on a list of abusive tax shelters and has more recently focused audits on them.
The penalties for such transactions are extremely high and can pile up quickly - $100,000 per individual and $200,000 per entity per tax year for each failure to disclose the transaction - often exceeding the disallowed taxes.
There are business owners who owe $6,000 in taxes but have been assessed $1.2 million in penalties. The existing cases involve many types of businesses, including doctors' offices, dental practices, grocery store owners, mortgage companies and restaurant owners. Some are trying to negotiate with the IRS. Others are not waiting. A class action has been filed and cases in several states are ongoing. The business owners claim that they were targeted by insurance companies; and their agents to purchase the plans without any disclosure that the IRS viewed the plans as abusive tax shelters. Other defendants include financial advisors who recommended the plans, accountants who failed to fill out required tax forms and law firms that drafted opinion letters legitimizing the plans, which were used as marketing tools.
A 412(i) plan is a form of defined benefit pension plan. A 419(e) plan is a similar type of health and benefits plan. Typically, these were sold to small, privately held businesses with fewer than 20 employees and several million dollars in gross revenues. What distinguished a legitimate plan from the plans at issue were the life insurance policies used to fund them. The employer would make large cash contributions in the form of insurance premiums, deducting the entire amounts. The insurance policy was designed to have a "springing cash value," meaning that for the first 5-7 years it would have a near-zero cash value, and then spring up in value.
Just before it sprung, the owner would purchase the policy from the trust at the low cash value, thus making a tax-free transaction. After the cash value shot up, the owner could take tax-free loans against it. Meanwhile, the insurance agents collected exorbitant commissions on the premiums - 80 to 110 percent of the first year's premium, which could exceed $1 million.
Technically, the IRS's problems with the plans were that the "springing cash" structure disqualified them from being 412(i) plans and that the premiums, which dwarfed any payout to a beneficiary, violated incidental death benefit rules.
Under §6707A of the Internal Revenue Code, once the IRS flags something as an abusive tax shelter, or "listed transaction," penalties are imposed per year for each failure to disclose it. Another allegation is that businesses weren't told that they had to file Form 8886, which discloses a listed transaction.
According to Lance Wallach of Plainview, N.Y. (516-938-5007), who testifies as an expert in cases involving the plans, the vast majority of accountants either did not file the forms for their clients or did not fill them out correctly.
Because the IRS did not begin to focus audits on these types of plans until some years after they became listed transactions, the penalties have already stacked up by the time of the audits.
Another reason plaintiffs are going to court is that there are few alternatives - the penalties are not appealable and must be paid before filing an administrative claim for a refund.

The suits allege misrepresentation, fraud and other consumer claims. "In street language, they lied," said Peter Losavio, a plaintiffs' attorney in Baton Rouge, La., who is investigating several cases. So far they have had mixed results. Losavio said that the strength of an individual case would depend on the disclosures made and what the sellers knew or should have known about the risks.
In 2004, the IRS issued notices and revenue rulings indicating that the plans were listed transactions. But plaintiffs' lawyers allege that there were earlier signs that the plans ran afoul of the tax laws, evidenced by the fact that the IRS is auditing plans that existed before 2004.
"Insurance companies were aware this was dancing a tightrope," said William Noll, a tax attorney in Malvern, Pa. "These plans were being scrutinized by the IRS at the same time they were being promoted, but there wasn't any disclosure of the scrutiny to unwitting customers."
A defense attorney, who represents benefits professionals in pending lawsuits, said the main defense is that the plans complied with the regulations at the time and that "nobody can predict the future."
An employee benefits attorney who has settled several cases against insurance companies, said that although the lost tax benefit is not recoverable, other damages include the hefty commissions - which in one of his cases amounted to $860,000 the first year - as well as the costs of handling the audit and filing amended tax returns.
Defying the individualized approach an attorney filed a class action in federal court against four insurance companies claiming that they were aware that since the 1980s the IRS had been calling the policies potentially abusive and that in 2002 the IRS gave lectures calling the plans not just abusive but "criminal." A judge dismissed the case against one of the insurers that sold 412(i) plans.
The court said that the plaintiffs failed to show the statements made by the insurance companies were fraudulent at the time they were made, because IRS statements prior to the revenue rulings indicated that the agency may or may not take the position that the plans were abusive. The attorney, whose suit also names law firm for its opinion letters approving the plans, will appeal the dismissal to the 5th Circuit.
In a case that survived a similar motion to dismiss, a small business owner is suing Hartford Insurance to recover a "seven-figure" sum in penalties and fees paid to the IRS. A trial is expected in August.
Last July, in response to a letter from members of Congress, the IRS put a moratorium on collection of §6707A penalties, but only in cases where the tax benefits were less than $100,000 per year for individuals and $200,000 for entities. That moratorium was recently extended until March 1, 2010.

But tax experts say the audits and penalties continue. "There's a bit of a disconnect between what members of Congress thought they meant by suspending collection and what is happening in practice. Clients are still getting bills and threats of liens," Wallach said.

"Thousands of business owners are being hit with million-dollar-plus fines. ... The audits are continuing and escalating. I just got four calls today," he said. A bill has been introduced in Congress to make the penalties less draconian, but nobody is expecting a magic bullet.

"From what we know, Congress is looking to make the penalties more proportionate to the tax benefit received instead of a fixed amount."