Feature Article

Following Betteridge’s Law of Headlines, the answer to the question posed in the headline is, “no.” Actually — because we’re talking about taxes here — we can say the answer is never so definitive, so let’s change it to “probably not.” But it's more complicated than it may seem.

Many multinational groups find that foreign-source dividends and other income earned by domestic affiliates are fully or partially subject to state income taxation, even where the federal system provides an exemption. This state-level “leakage” can be material – particularly in high-tax jurisdictions – and is often overlooked because the income appears sheltered at the federal level. For groups with predominantly foreign operations, a starting structure or a restructuring that causes one or more domestic affiliates to qualify as an “80/20 company” can substantially reduce or eliminate state taxation on that income.

A lot of client meetings still start with the same assumptions: W-2 in a U.S. state, mortgage nearby, a 401(k), maybe some RSUs, and a college-savings plan. Yet many of those “simple” clients now own an apartment in another country, freelance for a foreign company, or have parents wiring money from overseas. The tax code does not see those details as background color; it treats them as organizing facts. This is where citizenship, residency, and domicile quietly step onto center stage. For planners, the challenge is not memorizing every cross-border rule. It is knowing when a client is no longer “just domestic” and shifting your planning framework before you stumble into penalties, double taxation, or blown opportunities.

Astute readers of this publication may recognize that I frequently write on Cryptocurrency and also on Tax Court cases. It feels like Christmas to me to be able to write about a tax court case about crypto. This is only the Third Tax court case to even mention crypto, and the first to look at the underlying principles of taxation. (The other two were about including crypto assets in a CDP hearing and a frivolous tax protester argument). Today’s case, Paschall v. Commissioner, is about the taxation of staking income.

The credit for dependent-care expenses (such as daycare costs) has long been stuck at 20% for "average" taxpayers. It finally gets a permanent boost in 2026 (for returns filed in 2027). Also, the amount of money a taxpayer can put into a dependent care assistance program is increasing by $2,500 for 2026. This change presents a chance for taxpayers and tax pros to reevaluate which is better – claiming the credit or using a flex plan.

Clean energy tax credits have a lot going for them. Clients buy them at a discount, apply them dollar-for-dollar against federal tax liability, and walk away paying less to the IRS. That alone makes them worth a serious look. But here's what often gets overlooked and what makes these investments genuinely remarkable compared to almost anything else in your tax planning toolkit: the flexibility built into how and when the credits can be used. Can't absorb the full credit this year? Carry it back up to three years and trigger refunds on taxes your client already paid. Think about that for a second. There are very few places in the tax code where you can go back in time and rewrite last year's tax bill. This is one of them. Still have excess after the carryback? Carry it forward for up to 22 years. That's not a typo. Two decades of runway to put those credits to work as your client's passive income grows. And if circumstances change and the credits simply aren't needed? An emerging secondary market means there may even be an option to sell them. No other common tax planning strategy offers this combination a guaranteed discount on purchase, dollar-for-dollar offset of tax liability, the ability to look backward and forward, and a potential exit if plans change. Understanding how each of these features works is what separates a good credit investment from a great one.

A federal district court just struck down an IRS rule that had been closing the door on a pretty compelling tax savings opportunity available to your clients today, the Section 48E Clean Electricity Investment Tax Credit. The ruling, handed down on June 6, 2026, reinstated a key pathway that allows investors to lock in credit eligibility for large-scale wind and solar projects a pathway the IRS had tried to eliminate just last year. The window is not wide open. July 4, 2026 is still the critical deadline, and the government will almost certainly appeal. But for advisors who act quickly, this ruling creates a genuine, time-sensitive planning opportunity. Here is what you need to understand, and what you should be doing right now.

We’ve all been there. A client walks into your office and, somewhere in the conversation, you realize that a seemingly minor oversight, a missed deadline, a form nobody filed, an election nobody mentioned, has spiraled into a five- or six-figure tax problem. In my years of practice, some of the most expensive mistakes I’ve seen weren’t the result of aggressive planning gone wrong. They were small, quiet errors. The kind that happens when a deadline slips, an election isn’t made, or a form gets overlooked entirely. The tax code is unforgiving in these situations, and the IRS has little sympathy for “I didn’t know.” This article walks through some of the most common, and most costly, small mistakes that can devastate your client’s tax situation, along with practical guidance for avoiding them.