Careers

Diversity, Equity & Inclusion

Experience

Innovation

Interactive Maps

Locations

About

Pages

Meet our team of innovators
Ask us how we do it

Professionals

Insights

Services

Thompson Hine LLP, a full-service business law firm with approximately 400 lawyers in 8 offices, was ranked number 1 in the category “Most innovative North American law firms: New working models” by The Financial Times and was 1 of 7 firms shortlisted for The American Lawyer’s inaugural Legal Services Innovation Award. The firm has been recognized by the National Law Journal as a Legal Technology Trailblazer and featured by Bloomberg for its innovative service delivery models, which drive accuracy and predictability. The firm’s commitment to innovation is embodied in Thompson Hine SmartPaTHTM – a smarter way to work – predictable, efficient and aligned with client goals. For more information, please visit ThompsonHine.com and ThompsonHine.com/SmartPaTH.

Home | Thompson Hine LLP

Atlanta

Chicago

Cincinnati

Cleveland

Columbus

Dayton

Los Angeles

Minneapolis

New York

Washington, D.C.

contentpilot/introduction

The November 3 House version of H.R. 5376, Build Back Better Act clarifies that payments of deferred compensation earnings are not subject to the 3.8% net investment income tax. The original versions of the House bill raised the potential for an unintended result (or at least confusion) that would have subjected deferred compensation earnings to the 3.8% tax. Substantial changes to Section 1411 in other contexts created the issue. <a href="https://admin.thompsonhine.com/wp-content/uploads/1135/doc/Three-Eighths_Percent_Tax_Not_Applicable_To_Payments_of_Nonqualified_Deferred_Compensation_Earnings.pdf" target="_self" rel="noopener">The email explanation</a>&nbsp;of the issue was sent to Treasury Benefits Tax Counsel (Carol Weiser) and a staff person of House Ways and Means Committee Chair Rep. Neal (Kara Getz) and, thankfully, the edit was included in the version released on November 3.

core/paragraph

The potential hole was never an intended result. A similar issue surfaced when the 3.8% tax was enacted in 2010, which was resolved earlier. That background was used to get a similar favorable result. The revision was requested to prevent the sort of debate that existed back in 2010.

The added language that provides the exemption is bracketed on page 1886. <a href="https://admin.thompsonhine.com/wp-content/uploads/1135/doc/RevisionsToSection1411.PDF" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Click here</a>.

<a href="https://www.thompsonhine.com/professionals/ferrante-francesco" target="_self" rel="noopener">Francesco A. Ferrante</a> 937.443.6740 Francesco.Ferrante@ThompsonHine.com

This advisory bulletin may be reproduced, in whole or in part, with the prior permission of Thompson Hine LLP and acknowledgment of its source and copyright. This publication is intended to inform clients about legal matters of current interest. It is not intended as legal advice. Readers should not act upon the information contained in it without professional counsel.

This document may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions.

Revised House Bill Confirms that Proposed Revisions to Section 1411

Services