Saturday, August 7, 2010

Aug 11/Long Beach, CA- PATENTAX TALK & Business Mixer

Business Networking Mixer Prior to the TALK
Presented by:   Harrington & Harrington
*See Introduction of the Lecture Series Below*

Speaker:   David Lee Rice of  David Lee Rice APLC

What:  (1) Business Networking Mixer (6:00pm - 6:55pm)
            (2)CLE Presentation (7pm-9pm):

"Domestic Partnership and Tax - A Trap for the Unwary"

When:   August 11, 2010  (2nd Wednesday of the month)

Topic Areas:

    * The office of the Chief Counsel of the Internal Revenue Service just announced that they are accepting California law for purposes of classifying the types of property held by Domestic partners.

    * This Seminar will cover everything you wanted to know and more about the most recent tax consequences of being in a Domestic Partnership.  This is an extremely timely program for anyone who advises clients who are about to enter or about to terminate a domestic partnership.

Where :  Cardinal Pacific Escrow Education Center
               Suite 105
               6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway
               Long Beach, CA 90803
                           (Located on the corner of PCH & Second Street/
               /Westminister,   at "The MARKETPLACE".
               Building 6621 is both directly behind building
                           behind building 6615, and is faced by the front of
               the United Artists Long Beach Marketplace 6

Cost:   Complimentary for all attendees; Free & Ample Parking


CLE/CPE CREDIT For Attorneys, CPA's & Enrolled Agents:
            2.0 hours of MCLE credit for Attorneys
            2.0 hours of MCLE TAX SPECIALIZATION CREDIT
            2.4 hours of TAX CPE credit for CPA's & EA's

Accreditation Source:
           (1)   State Bar of California, Tax Specialization Provider 15203
           (2)   Harrington & Harrington is an IRS Approved
                   Education Provider - No. 672

Questions?  Call Curt Harrington at   (562)-594-9784  (562)-594-9784

Future Mixer and CLE/CPE Programs:
Date                                 Program                 Speaker
September 08, 2010         TBA                      TBA
October 13, 2010             TBA                      TBA
November 10, 2010          TBA                      TBA
December 08, 2010          TBA                      TBA

Check back with the website: , for any last-minute updates!

Educational Facilities Sponsor:    Cardinal Pacific Escrow

History and Benefits of the PATENTAX® TALK SERIES:

This lecture series began October 2009 to meet several needs:

1.  In the current economy where CLE/CPE rates for tax
     specialization talks average $30 per hour, a low-cost alternative
     is needed.  Anyone who has knowledge of a PATENTAX® TALK
     can confer a significant benefit upon anyone able to attend.
     Please pass this information along to others who can attend.

2.  The Long Beach Area has traditionally lacked a tax discussion
     Forum and has lacked the local availability of tax specialization
     CLE/CPE credit for CPA's, Attorneys, & Enrolled Agents.

3.  Members of the Public are too-often offered a "commercial"
     concerning a variety of legal topics.  The are usually given scant
     information and are not often given a chance to hear talks
     of the type that practitioners attend for continuing education.
     The PATENTAX® TALK has content in sufficient depth to
     justify continuing professional education credits from both the
     State Bar of California & IRS, and yet is also open to the public.

4.  The PATENTAX® TALK was designed as an experiment to
     determine if non-"super technical" tax topics could be selected
     to draw equal amounts of attendance from tax specialists (tax
     practitioners including tax lawyers, CPA's & Enrolled Agents)
     and non-tax specialists (general attorneys and members of the
     public), especially if the talks were offered for free to everyone.

5.  What is PATENTAX® ; Who is Harrington & Harrington?

     Our objective is protection of the client's technology & business,
     and taking advantage of tax provisions in the client's startup &
     ongoing business, licensing, & end of business cycle. We
     recommend asset protection where possible, and the purchase of
     insurance for patent infringement where applicable (which can help
     to put the client on a more substantial defensive stance). We are
     generally not an IP litigating firm, as we are focused upon helping
     clients conserve & preserve their holdings rather than simply cause
     litigation drainage, as well as positioning for more advantageous tax
     treatment. We want to talk with people who need help in creating
     and protecting intellectual property and in helping the client take
     advantage of tax provisions benefiting them.

       Technical areas include electrical engineering, chemical engineering, & mechanical
       engineering, tax problems, intellectual property tax problems relating to patents and
       trademarks.  We try to help every client start business the right way by selecting the
       proper trademark which is not descriptive of the goods and services, preferably not a
       dictionary term, no last names, no geographics and neither scandalous nor closely related
       to another mark. Why? Because such a mark will: (1) maximize goodwill. (2) Reduce the
       probability of trademark lawsuits, the cost to you of which are generally NOT
       DEDUCTIBLE, (3) Reduce the probability of confusion and having the return from
       advertising expenditures end up in your competitors pockets, and (4) Maximize the tax
       effects and the control effects at the end of your business life so that a low tax rate sale
       (capital gains if possible), or a more secure sale (owner financed if need be) is achieved.
       If you pick a bad mark, the litigation and loss of the advantages that could have been
       had are difficult to overcome. Our objective is all of these things, as well as a smooth
      trademark application process.


Curt Harrington
Patent & Tax Attorney
Harrington & Harrington
No. 91719
2300 Redondo Avenue
Long Beach, CA 90809-1719
Phone (562) 594-9784
Fx(562) 594-4414

1 comment:

  1. Please consider an alternate viewpoint in your seminar:

    The IRS ruling is wrong.
    I couldn’t disagree more with the premise that the ruling is a positive one. The IRS ruling hurts domestic partners and does not help most of them.
    It forces Domestic Partners to file their tax returns in a way that may not be beneficial to them.
    Currently the IRS refuses to allow Domestic Partners to file as married. In all other relationship/business ownership cases the IRS uses State property and ownership laws for Federal income tax purposes. In California’s case that means the only legal entity the IRS recognizes for Domestic Partners is as partners in a partnership. Under California law partnerships do not have to be written, and income and expenses can be allocated by partners by agreement. Under this premise the IRS ruling is non-sense and should/will be overturned.
    Some of the more than 100 harms that ALWAYS requiring splitting all the joint income in half will contribute to:
    1) Low income parents will lose grants and scholarships based on their income for their children in college.
    2) Income from dividends and interest cannot be allocated to the lower income partner resulting in higher taxes.
    3) Expenses for the payment of the mortgage and property taxes cannot be allocated to the higher income partner who actually made the payments. In other words the IRS now is trying to say that Domestic Partners must file as single - yet refuses to allow them to take their mortgage interest deduction which they made 100%.
    4) Self employed persons with spouses that get health coverage for them will have their health benefits taxed 100% on one partner’s Federal return and o% deductable on the other partners return. In other words the IRS wins both ways and the taxpayers lose both ways.
    The IRS ruling is twisted and illogical. It only benefits Domestic Partnerships where one partner is rich and the other a stay at home partner. For over 90% of Domestic Partners it will hurt them. Note the 90% figure is my estimate based on over 30 years of income tax preparation.
    My only hope is that the IRS having really messed up its rulings will have to recognize the marriages as marriages and put all this nonsense to rest.
    Sorry but posting must be anonymous to protect me and my clients from IRS retaliation.