{"id":10662,"date":"2022-05-27T21:58:00","date_gmt":"2022-05-27T21:58:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/taxops.com\/?p=10662"},"modified":"2022-07-28T21:33:19","modified_gmt":"2022-07-28T21:33:19","slug":"jamie-overberg-letter-to-irs-requesting-guidance-on-section-174a","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/taxops.com\/jamie-overberg-letter-to-irs-requesting-guidance-on-section-174a\/","title":{"rendered":"Jamie Overberg Letter to IRS Requesting Guidance on Section 174(a)"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<div style=\"height:53px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-gallery has-nested-images columns-default is-cropped wp-block-gallery-1 is-layout-flex wp-block-gallery-is-layout-flex\">\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\"><img decoding=\"async\" width=\"1024\" height=\"536\" data-id=\"10676\" src=\"data:image\/gif;base64,R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP\/\/\/yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7\" data-src=\"https:\/\/taxops.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/Jamie-Overberg-letter-to-IRS-1024x536.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-10676 lazyload\" data-srcset=\"https:\/\/taxops.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/Jamie-Overberg-letter-to-IRS-1024x536.png 1024w, https:\/\/taxops.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/Jamie-Overberg-letter-to-IRS-980x513.png 980w, https:\/\/taxops.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/Jamie-Overberg-letter-to-IRS-480x251.png 480w\" sizes=\"(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1024px, 100vw\" \/><noscript><img decoding=\"async\" width=\"1024\" height=\"536\" data-id=\"10676\" src=\"https:\/\/taxops.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/Jamie-Overberg-letter-to-IRS-1024x536.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-10676 lazyload\" srcset=\"https:\/\/taxops.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/Jamie-Overberg-letter-to-IRS-1024x536.png 1024w, https:\/\/taxops.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/Jamie-Overberg-letter-to-IRS-980x513.png 980w, https:\/\/taxops.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/Jamie-Overberg-letter-to-IRS-480x251.png 480w\" sizes=\"(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1024px, 100vw\" \/><\/noscript><\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:53px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\"><p><em><em><em><em><a href=\"https:\/\/taxops.com\/jamie-overberg\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><em>Jamie Overberg<\/em><\/a><em>, Partner at TaxOps Minimization, suggested that the 2022-2023 priority guidance plan (<a href=\"https:\/\/linkprotect.cudasvc.com\/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.taxnotes.com%2flr%2fresolve%2f%2f7df8r&amp;c=E,1,rlcXKJ4YZ9bYJICGf31ErQUuyze2zBx2jRu4QSZisL2JMZYRF8U98xNINHLxa8KvrkAESZAyKwkdn572O-mkdJI8bPTGOU1U5EVpq9DSWX3-kw,,&amp;typo=1\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Notice 2021-22<\/a>) include guidance that identifies cost categories for research and experimental expenditures under section 174(a).<\/em><\/em><\/em><\/em><\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:8px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">May 12, 2022<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Ms. Emily M. Lesniak<br>Office of the Associate Chief Counsel<br>Procedure and Administration<br>Internal Revenue Service<br>Attn: CC:PA:LPD:PR (Notice 2022-21) Room 5203<br>P.O. Box 7604<br>Ben Franklin Station<br>Washington, DC 20224<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Re: Recommendations on the 2022-2023 Priority Guidance Plan<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Dear Ms. Lesniak:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">We at TaxOps, LLC, respectively request that guidance be provided related to Public Law 115-97, commonly referred to as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA).<a href=\"https:\/\/linkprotect.cudasvc.com\/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.taxnotes.com%2ftax-notes-today-federal%2fdepreciation-amortization-and-depletion%2fcost-categories-needed-re-expensing-group-says%2f2022%2f05%2f13%2f7dh6p%237dh6p-0000001&amp;c=E,1,6FVmxGgmkT1rajP_scsCLnPYkzLEAaFuo13QdvcV2cBES5ASNIZKhSfHuHyJw42zRpiJibuLidTIdXppDe7FweJKMoaR8H11fxW0FbAeHl5pssUS&amp;typo=1\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">1<\/a>&nbsp;Section 13206 of the TCJA amended section 174 and resulted in significant changes to the treatment of research and experimental (R&amp;E) expenditures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">I. Specifically, we request guidance that identifies cost categories for section 174(a) expenditures.<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">BACKGROUND<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Before the provisions of TCJA were effective, the law allowed taxpayers to plan whether they want to use deductions in the current year or defer them based on facts and circumstances. Additional provisions allowed taxpayers to amortize over 10 years expenses that might otherwise be tagged as deductible under section 174(a).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Also prior to the TCJA, the tax accounting treatment of current expensing generally would have been allowable whether the expenses were deductible as ordinary and necessary trade or business expenditures under section 162(a) or R&amp;E expenditures under section 174(a).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Beginning January 1, 2022, all companies \u2014 from multi-billion-dollar corporations to small business owners \u2014 began capitalizing section 174 expenses, spreading the amortization of those expenses either five or 15 years. These changes hit first quarter estimates.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This change required business taxpayers to evaluate their expenses and establish a methodology identifying expenses subject to mandatory amortization before tracking those expenses, in some cases for the first time. Section 174 costs are more expansive than R&amp;D costs. Wages, supplies, outside contract and leased computer costs are eligible for research tax credits. The items to be capitalized under section 174 are not explicitly defined. The code refers to costs related to.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The regulations apply general standards to costs incidental to the development or improvement of a product.<a href=\"https:\/\/linkprotect.cudasvc.com\/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.taxnotes.com%2ftax-notes-today-federal%2fdepreciation-amortization-and-depletion%2fcost-categories-needed-re-expensing-group-says%2f2022%2f05%2f13%2f7dh6p%237dh6p-0000002&amp;c=E,1,e0j9p_eKpeu6gTy03Pu5_Ufj5Z3Tq4FabRUWCJ420dWmxaztIhNBJlVFyirOkjmNqc6hZhLf72DX3o-3uuJSrppTtcIT4kU0ENHqaZIdUxaq2v_oCAJGHB-IBw,,&amp;typo=1\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">2<\/a>&nbsp;Section 174 further focuses on the nature of activities that fall under research and experimental expenditures, rather than clarifying specific categories for expenditures. We recommend that the IRS delineate the various categories of expenses, both direct and indirect, that fall under the definition of research and experimental (R&amp;E) expenditures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The regulations exclude eligibility of certain expenditures including ordinary testing for quality control, management studies, and advertising and promotions, amongst others.<a href=\"https:\/\/linkprotect.cudasvc.com\/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.taxnotes.com%2ftax-notes-today-federal%2fdepreciation-amortization-and-depletion%2fcost-categories-needed-re-expensing-group-says%2f2022%2f05%2f13%2f7dh6p%237dh6p-0000003&amp;c=E,1,5AIfM18O1mL_qPL8zY8CRj_8HG5HemJEqGuA6H2t87Zu41hRGfB1kzTNf4zao0ZDwGhh9RB8tEEjn-VJDYKDBPWhhihpo7oxEiqTPd5ozRbl9A,,&amp;typo=1\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">3<\/a>&nbsp;While interpretive guidance suggests that allocable indirect costs and overhead may be section 174 eligible,<a href=\"https:\/\/linkprotect.cudasvc.com\/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.taxnotes.com%2ftax-notes-today-federal%2fdepreciation-amortization-and-depletion%2fcost-categories-needed-re-expensing-group-says%2f2022%2f05%2f13%2f7dh6p%237dh6p-0000004&amp;c=E,1,D1XfSUxAg6Aulbef0dgtHrfgAYmF-_xPf0JUm8T4lC42OxfPji7sT0Uq8hsZTd_BKApP31Jo4rSP1XQnOZHLyOHfjNEU8exdC2nnG5MfzB_arQ,,&amp;typo=1\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">4<\/a>&nbsp;we recommend clarifying the incidental costs to develop or improve a product per Reg. \u00a71.174-2.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">We appreciate your consideration of our recommendation and welcome the opportunity to further discuss our comments. If you have any questions, please contact Mark Dunning,&nbsp;<a href=\"mailto:mdunning@taxops.com\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">mdunning@taxops.com,<\/a>&nbsp;720-227-0420, or myself at&nbsp;<a href=\"mailto:joverberg@taxops.com\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">joverberg@taxops.com,<\/a>&nbsp;720-227-0421.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Sincerely,<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Jamie Overberg,<br>Partner, TaxOps, LLC<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>FOOTNOTES<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><a href=\"https:\/\/linkprotect.cudasvc.com\/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.taxnotes.com%2ftax-notes-today-federal%2fdepreciation-amortization-and-depletion%2fcost-categories-needed-re-expensing-group-says%2f2022%2f05%2f13%2f7dh6p%237dh6p-0000005&amp;c=E,1,2sc6_oYXV1XNbQwSsPplDFNhX2kl_MdowRC1vUawPTh7V9Z-pCXxz7GIYG6sbIaWJccm50tGaFiZSaxwojgOg1EQKjKkQItDGJ3Lks47-3s,&amp;typo=1\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">1<\/a>Public Law 115-97, 131 Stat. 2054.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><a href=\"https:\/\/linkprotect.cudasvc.com\/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.taxnotes.com%2ftax-notes-today-federal%2fdepreciation-amortization-and-depletion%2fcost-categories-needed-re-expensing-group-says%2f2022%2f05%2f13%2f7dh6p%237dh6p-0000006&amp;c=E,1,dPB_gUNScmsAxNTfbNgJbq_voDarZxo0iTGAHGDUeJYQ9CZ3hHXZ3Ux8YoxqLU1Dnxl3NX1ct5ZuCr88rXfHvqmiHhjG5TP3zwXks8ulu7DqZqf8CVijtHt7Mw,,&amp;typo=1\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">2<\/a>Reg. section 1.174-2(a)(1).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><a href=\"https:\/\/linkprotect.cudasvc.com\/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.taxnotes.com%2ftax-notes-today-federal%2fdepreciation-amortization-and-depletion%2fcost-categories-needed-re-expensing-group-says%2f2022%2f05%2f13%2f7dh6p%237dh6p-0000007&amp;c=E,1,RZEeJLJ4J-Z9iaJBCzTncInywkweEqRy8SsCy163Ri5kBNK2SrfXC0RRYK-SUXbHC8wOyVoBexb8HPiP2iQIoArlWryMEJLaOtBuZfFgUGxjGiywvdyJEs0,&amp;typo=1\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">3<\/a>Reg. section 1.174-2(a)(6).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><a href=\"https:\/\/linkprotect.cudasvc.com\/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.taxnotes.com%2ftax-notes-today-federal%2fdepreciation-amortization-and-depletion%2fcost-categories-needed-re-expensing-group-says%2f2022%2f05%2f13%2f7dh6p%237dh6p-0000008&amp;c=E,1,jP7dIXRgKYZWnTMBkh9_0SJTw-PLCKfAxeIRcoDPSJ5nFKYMtafQEfQvJtGIz5YudqBbxiR8p2VCqaRwKuucIV7tTKUWxe9O4wDZ-biODgfltto0pwV8ioc_Ww,,&amp;typo=1\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">4<\/a>Rev. Rul. 73-275, for example, in which the IRS ruled that the expenses connected with a taxpayer&#8217;s product engineering department including overhead expenses were section 174 eligible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:50px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-buttons is-layout-flex wp-block-buttons-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-button\"><a class=\"wp-block-button__link\" href=\"https:\/\/taxops.com\/contact\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Let&#8217;s Talk Tax<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:47px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">More Tax News<\/h3>\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-latest-posts__list wp-block-latest-posts\"><li><a class=\"wp-block-latest-posts__post-title\" href=\"https:\/\/taxops.com\/auditor-independence-in-the-age-of-private-equity\/\">Auditor Independence in the Age of Private Equity: What CFOs Need to Know<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a class=\"wp-block-latest-posts__post-title\" href=\"https:\/\/taxops.com\/r-d-credits-for-software-companies\/\">R&amp;D Credits for Software Companies: Scrum Teams, Qualifiers, and Section 174 After OBBBA<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a class=\"wp-block-latest-posts__post-title\" href=\"https:\/\/taxops.com\/section-174-decoupling-what-tax-pros-need-to-know-state-by-state\/\">Section 174 Decoupling: What Tax Pros Need To Know State By State<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a class=\"wp-block-latest-posts__post-title\" href=\"https:\/\/taxops.com\/sean-espy-new-partner\/\">TaxOps Welcomes Sean Espy as Partner, Tax Minimization<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a class=\"wp-block-latest-posts__post-title\" href=\"https:\/\/taxops.com\/state-nexus-demystified-navigating-tax-compliance-after-wayfair-episode-1-2\/\">Your Tax Footprint Is Probably Bigger Than You Think: What Finance Leaders Need to Know About State Nexus<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n<div style=\"height:47px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-buttons is-layout-flex wp-block-buttons-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-button\"><a class=\"wp-block-button__link\" href=\"https:\/\/taxops.com\/contact\/#subscribe\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Subscribe to Tax News<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:47px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Jamie Overberg, Partner at TaxOps Minimization, suggested that the 2022-2023 priority guidance plan (Notice 2021-22) include guidance that identifies cost categories for research and experimental expenditures under section 174(a). May 12, 2022 Ms. Emily M. LesniakOffice of the Associate Chief CounselProcedure and AdministrationInternal Revenue ServiceAttn: CC:PA:LPD:PR (Notice 2022-21) Room 5203P.O. Box 7604Ben Franklin StationWashington, DC [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":10676,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"off","_et_pb_old_content":"<!-- wp:spacer {\"height\":\"53px\"} -->\n<div style=\"height:53px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n<!-- \/wp:spacer -->\n\n<!-- wp:gallery {\"linkTo\":\"none\"} -->\n<figure class=\"wp-block-gallery has-nested-images columns-default is-cropped\"><!-- wp:image {\"id\":10182,\"sizeSlug\":\"large\",\"linkDestination\":\"none\"} -->\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\"><img src=\"https:\/\/taxops.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/Texas-High-Court-Clarifies-Service-Receipt-Apportionment-1-1024x536.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-10182\"\/><\/figure>\n<!-- \/wp:image --><\/figure>\n<!-- \/wp:gallery -->\n\n<!-- wp:spacer {\"height\":\"53px\"} -->\n<div style=\"height:53px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n<!-- \/wp:spacer -->\n\n<!-- wp:quote -->\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote\"><p><em><em>The Texas Supreme Court has ruled in favor of apportioning service receipts to the location of personnel or equipment, a position providing clarity to taxpayers on whether to source receipts from services performed versus where customers are at.<\/em>&nbsp;<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<!-- \/wp:quote -->\n\n<!-- wp:quote -->\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote\"><p><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<!-- \/wp:quote -->\n\n<!-- wp:paragraph -->\n<p>By <a href=\"https:\/\/taxops.com\/tram-le\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\" title=\"Tram Le\">Tram Le<\/a> <\/p>\n<!-- \/wp:paragraph -->\n\n<!-- wp:paragraph -->\n<p>On March 25, 2022, the Texas Supreme Court held in favor of the taxpayer that services revenue is apportioned to the location where services are performed, consistent with Texas law.<sup>1<\/sup> The Court found that the performance of service is located where the taxpayer\u2019s personnel or equipment is physically doing useful work for the customer.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<!-- \/wp:paragraph -->\n\n<!-- wp:paragraph -->\n<p>The case involves Sirius XM (Sirius XM Radio, Inc. v. Hegar, Tx. Sup. Ct. No. 20-0462 (3\/25\/22)), whose headquarters, transmission equipment and production studios used in providing a subscription-based satellite radio service are largely located outside of Texas. In the 2010 and 2011 tax years, Sirius XM apportioned tax based on costs of activities in Texas and outside of Texas. Under Texas rules, service revenue is apportioned to Texas based on the \u201cfair value of the services\u201d rendered in Texas where services are performed in more than one state.<sup>2<\/sup>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<!-- \/wp:paragraph -->\n\n<!-- wp:paragraph -->\n<p>For those tax years, the Texas Comptroller adjusted on audit to base the tax on the percentage of Sirius XM\u2019s Texas subscribers. The Comptroller argued that service revenue is sourced to Texas if the \u201creceipt-producing, end-product act\u201d takes place in Texas. In this case, such an act was considered the decryption of the satellite network and enabling of each subscriber\u2019s radio to receive Sirius XM\u2019s signal. However, Sirius XM argued that its services \u2013 the production and broadcasting of radio content \u2013 was mainly performed outside of Texas.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<!-- \/wp:paragraph -->\n\n<!-- wp:paragraph -->\n<p>The Texas Supreme Court ultimately agreed that Sirius XM was providing satellite radio content and those services are performed in Texas if the labor employed in that service is doing the work in Texas. This constitues a natural reading of the law, which requires taxes due \u201cwhere service [is] performed in this state.\u201d This rejects the Comptroller premise of service taking place at the customer location. The Court also rejected the use of the \u201creceipt-producing, end-product\u201d test to determine where a service is being performed.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<!-- \/wp:paragraph -->\n\n<!-- wp:paragraph -->\n<p>Although the Court ruled in favor of the taxpayer, the case was remanded to the Appellate court for further review of Sirius XM\u2019s cost of performing services and evidence to support its \u201cfair value of services\u201d performed in Texas.&nbsp;&nbsp;<\/p>\n<!-- \/wp:paragraph -->\n\n<!-- wp:paragraph -->\n<p>The Texas Supreme Court opinion provides clarification in apportioning service revenue in Texas and determining whether services are performed in the state. Taxpayers doing business in Texas should carefully review business operations, nature of services, i.e., properly characterizing the services provided to customers and location of equipment, facilities, and personnel to properly apportion revenue.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<\/p>\n<!-- \/wp:paragraph -->\n\n<!-- wp:paragraph -->\n<p>In addition, if services are being performed in Texas and outside of Texas, taxpayers must properly evaluate methods of determining the fair value of services and maintain sufficient evidence to support what revenue is apportioned to Texas. Contact a TaxOps advisor is you need assistance assessing nexus and taxability in the state of Texas and everywhere you do business.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<!-- \/wp:paragraph -->\n\n<!-- wp:paragraph -->\n<p>Tram Le is a member of the SALTovation team at TaxOps and an adjunct professor at the University of Texas at Arlington. She writes about hot topics in state and local tax affecting business operations and growth strategies and the Spreading SALTovation column for Tax Notes.&nbsp;Reach out to Tram at <a href=\"mailto:tle@taxops.com\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\" title=\"Tram Le\">tle@taxops.com<\/a>.&nbsp;&nbsp;<\/p>\n<!-- \/wp:paragraph -->\n\n<!-- wp:spacer {\"height\":\"53px\"} -->\n<div style=\"height:53px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n<!-- \/wp:spacer -->\n\n<!-- wp:buttons -->\n<div class=\"wp-block-buttons\"><!-- wp:button -->\n<div class=\"wp-block-button\"><a class=\"wp-block-button__link\" href=\"https:\/\/taxops.com\/contact\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Let's Talk Tax<\/a><\/div>\n<!-- \/wp:button --><\/div>\n<!-- \/wp:buttons -->\n\n<!-- wp:spacer {\"height\":\"47px\"} -->\n<div style=\"height:47px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n<!-- \/wp:spacer -->\n\n<!-- wp:heading {\"level\":3} -->\n<h3>More Tax News<\/h3>\n<!-- \/wp:heading -->\n\n<!-- wp:latest-posts \/-->\n\n<!-- wp:spacer {\"height\":\"47px\"} -->\n<div style=\"height:47px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n<!-- \/wp:spacer -->\n\n<!-- wp:buttons -->\n<div class=\"wp-block-buttons\"><!-- wp:button -->\n<div class=\"wp-block-button\"><a class=\"wp-block-button__link\" href=\"https:\/\/taxops.com\/contact\/#subscribe\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Subscribe to Tax News<\/a><\/div>\n<!-- \/wp:button --><\/div>\n<!-- \/wp:buttons -->\n\n<!-- wp:spacer {\"height\":\"47px\"} -->\n<div style=\"height:47px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n<!-- \/wp:spacer -->","_et_gb_content_width":"","spt_transcript":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[382,78,226],"tags":[252,284,126,998,265,92,48,49,50,563,783,30,52,80],"class_list":["post-10662","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-main-tax-min","category-tax-savings","category-tax-news","tag-accountant","tag-cfo","tag-cpa","tag-faqs","tag-finance-professional","tag-irs","tag-rd","tag-research-and-development","tag-research-credit","tag-research-expenses","tag-section-174","tag-state-and-local-tax","tag-tax-credit","tag-tax-provider"],"aioseo_notices":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/taxops.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/Jamie-Overberg-letter-to-IRS.png","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/taxops.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10662","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/taxops.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/taxops.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/taxops.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/taxops.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10662"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/taxops.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10662\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":10677,"href":"https:\/\/taxops.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10662\/revisions\/10677"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/taxops.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/10676"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/taxops.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10662"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/taxops.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10662"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/taxops.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10662"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}