Senate Finance Committee ranking minority member Ron Wyden, D-Ore., unveiled a proposal last week that would replace current depreciation rules with a Senate Finance Committee ranking minority member Ron Wyden, D-Ore., very different, pooled asset approach.
The proposal was released as a discussion draft and follows the same general approach that former Senate Finance Committee Chair Max Baucus, D-Mont., used in a 2013 tax reform proposal. But unlike Baucus’s draft, which was designed to raise revenue for tax reform, Wyden’s proposal is revenue neutral.
The Wyden draft would replace the modified accelerated cost recovery system (MACRS) with a new pooling recovery system. Taxpayers would no longer track depreciation schedules on an asset-by-asset basis. Instead, they would pool property into six separate categories and deduct a designated percentage of the total amount in each pool annually.
The percentages are designed to be revenue neutral and produce a depreciation deduction with a current value roughly equivalent to current MACRS depreciation:
3-year property: 49%
5-year property: 34%
7-year property: 25%
10-year property: 18%
15-year property: 11%
20-year property: 8%
The pool balance would be calculated by adding the cost basis of any new assets to the beginning balance and subtracting any sale proceeds. Taxpayers would then deduct the designated percentage of the pool balance and carry over the remainder. Passenger automobiles weighing 6,000 pounds or less could not increase the pool by more than $45,000.
Generally, no gain or loss would be recognized unless the pool reached a negative balance or there were no assets left. A negative pool balance would give rise to gain under Section 1245, taxed as ordinary income, and this would restore the pool balance to zero. If no assets were left in the pool with a positive balance, the balance would be deducted as a terminal loss.
Real property would not be included in the pools and would continue to be depreciated over 27.5 years for residential property and 39 years for nonresidential property.
Wyden and Democratic Finance Committee staff are hoping the pooled approach can provide a simpler calculation, and eliminate the need for the mid-year convention and asset-by-asset tracking. However, the transition could be disruptive, and taxpayers who already track assets on an individual basis for financial accounting would no longer simply adjust these figures for tax purposes, but would be required to perform a whole new calculation.
Significant tax reform proposals are unlikely to be enacted this year, but these kinds of discussions drafts can influence future reform efforts.
For more information, please contact Dustin Stamper in the Washington National Tax Office.
Tax professional standards statement
This content supports Grant Thornton LLP’s marketing of professional services and is not written tax advice directed at the particular facts and circumstances of any person. If you are interested in the topics presented herein, we encourage you to contact us or an independent tax professional to discuss their potential application to your particular situation. Nothing herein shall be construed as imposing a limitation on any person from disclosing the tax treatment or tax structure of any matter addressed herein. To the extent this content may be considered to contain written tax advice, any written advice contained in, forwarded with or attached to this content is not intended by Grant Thornton LLP to be used, and cannot be used, by any person for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed under the Internal Revenue Code.
The information contained herein is general in nature and is based on authorities that are subject to change. It is not, and should not be construed as, accounting, legal or tax advice provided by Grant Thornton LLP to the reader. This material may not be applicable to, or suitable for, the reader’s specific circumstances or needs and may require consideration of tax and nontax factors not described herein. Contact Grant Thornton LLP or other tax professionals prior to taking any action based upon this information. Changes in tax laws or other factors could affect, on a prospective or retroactive basis, the information contained herein; Grant Thornton LLP assumes no obligation to inform the reader of any such changes. All references to “Section,” “Sec.,” or “§” refer to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.