Archive for August, 2010

The Market Can Stay Irrational Longer Than You Can Stay Solvent

Thursday, August 26th, 2010

Author: Robert M. Freeman

The following views and opinions do not necessarily reflect those of the Keiter Stephens Hurst Gary and Shreaves or Capital Advisory Group.

John Maynard Keynes, a well known British economist, once said that “The market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent”, which has proved to be true over and over again. Perhaps the best example of this was the tech bubble of the late 1990s, when forward PEs (price to earnings ratios) climbed from the historical averages of about 15 to 17 to over 26 at the peak in early 2000. As the PE ratios rose to higher and higher levels many were tempted to short the market (bet that it would decline), which in some cases cost them dearly as the market continued to rise.

It appears that we are looking at a similar situation today with Treasury Bonds, which have been bid up in price reducing their yields to near historic lows. Apparently, most bond investors aren’t aware of the risk inherent in the fixed income markets, as FINRA (Financial Industry Regulatory Authority) discovered in a recent survey that over 79% of investors did not understand that bond prices decline as interest rates rise.

In an August 18th Wall Street Journal article entitled “The Great American Bond Bubble,” Jeremy Siegel describes the risk that many bond investors appear to be missing. He points out that while about $232 billion dollars left stock funds in the first 6 months of the year, bond fund inflows have totaled about $559 billion dollars. Although this is not surprising to me in light of the dismal stock market performance over the last decade, it will likely end badly for many of these bond investors. As Siegel points out in his article (at which point the 10 year treasury was yielding 2.8%, compared with the current yield of 2.61%) a rise in the yield to 3.15% over the next 12 months would result in no return as the decline in price would offset the coupon payments. In addition, if rates rose to 4%, an investor who purchased the bonds at the 2.8% yield would lose about three times the coupon payment.

However, since the market can stay irrational, betting on rising yields at this point may be a dangerous game. Based on the weakness of recent economic data, it is possible that the Federal Reserve will attempt to push rates even lower in the coming months. Given the current political climate and upcoming election, it is unlikely that Congress would be interested in additional stimulus spending even if the economy continues to weaken. So, it will likely be left up to the Fed and its range of monetary policy tools.  Unfortunately, there may not be much that the Federal Reserve can do, as additional quantitative easing is likely to have a limited effect; the primary problem is not the cost of credit, but the deflationary effects of a lack of aggregate demand.

In summary, Treasury Bonds are overpriced by most measures, but could go higher (pushing yields down further), if the economy continues to slow or contract. However, it is likely that over the next several years, inflation expectations will increase, pushing up bond yields and forcing down bond prices. Unfortunately, this likely to be an unhappy surprise for many investors who were seeking the “safety” of investing their money in Treasury securities.

NC Franchise Tax Refund Opportunity For Contractors

Wednesday, August 25th, 2010

We have recently become aware of a potential refund opportunity in North Carolina. Contractors using the percentage of completion methods that operate in North Carolina may have a franchise tax refund opportunity. The North Carolina Department of Revenue recently issued a notice regarding franchise tax paid on billings in excess of costs. The 2009 NC legislature provided an exemption for the “billings in excess of costs” liability account from the capital stock, surplus, and undivided profits base of the state’s franchise tax, effective for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2010. A recent amendment makes these changes effective retroactively to taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2007, and authorizes taxpayers that paid franchise tax on the “billings in excess of costs” liability in taxable years 2007, 2008, and 2009 to apply for a refund of the franchise tax paid attributable to those amounts. The Department of Revenue issued a notice providing that taxpayers that paid franchise tax on their “billings in excess of costs” liability account for tax years in which the taxes were due in 2007, 2008, or 2009 may request a refund by filing either an amended income and franchise tax return (CD-405 or CD-401S) or Form NC-19 (Claim for Refund of Taxes). According to the notice, taxpayers are instructed to enter “Franchise Tax Paid on Billings in Excess of Costs” in the explanation section of the request for refund. To be considered timely, a request for refund must be received by the Department no later than January 1, 2011, and any refund requests received after that date will be barred. Source: http://www.dor.state.nc.us/taxes/corporate/ (PDF)

Please do not hesitate to contact us for additional information or for assistance in filing claims for refunds.

Audit Suspension For Auto Dealer UNICAP Issues Now Open-Ended

Monday, August 23rd, 2010

In a memorandum posted to its website, IRS has announced that it will suspend examination of auto dealership Code Sec. 263A issues until it publishes additional guidance. Earlier, IRS had suspended examinations on these issues for the Sept. 15, 2009, through Dec. 31, 2010, period.

Background. Auto dealerships generally are subject to the UNICAP rules of Code Sec. 263A, and therefore must include in inventory costs the direct and indirect costs properly allocable to property that is inventory. In a Technical Advice Memo (TAM) issued as PLR 200736026, IRS rejected an auto dealer’s hybrid self-developed method of capitalizing additional Code Sec. 263A costs, and set forth in detail its views on how a typical auto dealer should handle costs, including repair/installation of parts on customer owned cars (treated as handling costs, not as a production activity), installation by the dealer or a subcontractor of parts to new and used vehicles owned by the dealer (these constitute production activities), and storage costs (depends on whether on-site or off-site).

IRS has classified auto dealership Code Sec. 263A issues as a Tier III issue (risks that represent the highest compliance risk for a particular industry) because of a high level of taxpayer noncompliance.

Earlier suspension. To encourage compliance and give auto dealers a chance to voluntarily change their methods of accounting to comply with the legal reasoning outlined in PLR 200736026 , IRS in October of 2009 announced that it was suspending examination of auto dealership Code Sec. 263A issues effective Sept. 15, 2009 and continuing through Dec. 31 2010. During this period, examiners were instructed not to raise these issues on auto dealership examinations (but were told to continue to evaluate and examine other dealership issues, including other inventory issues, if appropriate).

Those auto dealership exams in process as of Sept. 15, 2009 could continue to develop Code Sec. 263A issues, but dealers that were under exam for which these issues are under consideration, as defined in Rev Proc 2008-52, 2008-2 CB 587, Sec. 3.09(1) , could elect to change their method of accounting, and Rev Proc 2008-52, Sec. 6.03(4) (relating to director consent to a change in method of accounting by a taxpayer under examination), was deemed to apply. IRS said that effective Jan. 1, 2011, exams of auto dealership Code Sec. 263A issues would resume.

Now suspension is open-ended. IRS says its Office of Chief Counsel is currently considering additional published guidance related to dealership Code Sec. 263A issues. It is expected that the guidance will address many of the issues outlined in PLR 200736026 and will apply to various retail motor vehicle dealerships. In anticipation of the pending guidance, IRS says it will extend the existing audit suspension period until the date that pending guidance is published in the Internal Revenue Bulletin.