Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

Exempt Organizations: Form 990s Due May 15 Have Not Been Extended

Client Alert
March 27, 2020

Although the IRS has automatically postponed the filing and payment deadline from April 15, 2020 until July 15, 2020 for most taxpayer returns, the IRS notice specifically does not apply to any Federal informational return.

Forms 990-T

Form 990-T is generally filed by an exempt organization to report certain unrelated business income.  If the exempt organization is required to file Form 990-T on April 15, 2020 then the deadline is automatically postponed until July 15, 2020 under IRS Notice 2020-18. A Form 990-T due on May 15, 2020 has not been postponed and will still need filed on May 15, 2020.

Forms 990, 990-EZ, and 990-PF

Forms 990, 990-EZ, and 990-PF are informational returns filed by exempt organizations annually with the IRS. Form 990 is due on May 15th of each year. IRS Notice 2020-18 does not apply to these information returns. Therefore, exempt organizations with a Form 990 filing date of May 15, 2020 are not afforded relief and will still need to file the return on May 15, 2020.

IRS Filing and Payment Deadlines Questions and Answers

The IRS has provided a filing and payment deadlines questions and answers on its website to assist taxpayers in understanding which returns and payments have been extended and which have not been extended. Those questions and answers are located at https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/filing-and-payment-deadlines-questions-and-answers.

For additional questions related to the tax exempt organizations, please contact BMD Tax Law Attorney Tracy Albanese at tlalbanese@bmdllc.com or (330) 253-9195.

Tax Exemptfiling deadlinepayment deadlineTax LawFederal informationTracy L. Albanese
Client Alert

Enhancing Privacy Protections for Substance Use Disorder Patient Records

February 16, 2024On February 8, 2024, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) finalized updated rules to 42 CFR Part 2 (“Part 2”) for the protection of Substance Use Disorder (“SUD”) patient records. The updated rules reflect the requirement that the Part 2 rules be more closely aligned with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”) privacy, breach notification, and enforcement rules as mandated by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act of 2020.Client Alert

Columbus, Ohio Ordinance Prohibits Employers from Inquiries into an Applicant’s Salary History

January 30, 2024Effective March 1, 2024, Columbus employers are prohibited from inquiring into an applicant’s salary history. Specifically, the ordinance provides that it is an unlawful discriminatory practice to:Client Alert

The Ohio Chemical Dependency Professionals Board’s Latest Batch of Rules: What Providers Should Know

January 26, 2024The Ohio Chemical Dependency Professionals Board has introduced new rules and amendments, covering various aspects such as CDCA certificate requirements, expanded services for LCDCs and CDCAs, remote supervision, and reciprocity application requirements. Notable changes include revised criteria for obtaining a CDCA certification, expanded services for LCDCs and CDCAs, and updated ethical obligations for licensees and certificate holders, including non-discrimination, confidentiality, and anti-sexual harassment measures.Client Alert

Governor Mike DeWine and The Ohio State University Introduce the SOAR Study on Ohio Mental Illness

January 22, 2024On January 19, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine and The Ohio State University announced a new research initiative, the State of Ohio Adversity and Resilience (“SOAR”) study, which will investigate all factors influencing Ohio’s mental illness and addiction epidemic.Client Alert

CHANGING TIDES: Summary and Effects of Burnett et. al. v. National Ass’n of Realtors, et. al.

January 17, 2024In April 2019, a class-action Complaint was filed in federal court for the Western District Court for Missouri arguing that the traditional payment agreements employed by many across the United States amounted to conspiracy resulting in the artificial increase in brokerage commissions. Plaintiffs, a class-action group comprised of sellers, argued that they paid excessive brokerage commissions upon the sale of their home as a result of the customary payment structure where Sellers agree to pay the full commission on the sale of their property, with Seller’s agent notating the portion of commission they are willing to pay to a Buyer’s agent at closing on the MLS or other similar system.
Older posts
Newer posts