會計外文翻譯---不確定時期的可變性給付稅收籌劃機會，靈活性，以及長遠性

1、<p>　　本科畢業(yè)論文（設計）</p><p>　　外 文 翻 譯</p><p><b>　　原文：</b></p><p>　　Variable pay Tax Planning for Uncertain Times: Opportunities, Flexibility, and the Long View </

2、p><p>　　With Congress struggling to come to grips with the politically thorny expiration of the so-called "Bush tax cuts," CFP practitioners are grappling with both shorter and longer-term tax plannin

3、g opportunities for their clients. At the same time, planners are also encouraging clients to weigh important non-tax variables when plotting out wealth-building strategies. </p><p>　　Whatever the outcome of

4、 the immediate ideological battle in Washington over federal marginal income tax rates and brackets, in 2013, higher income earners will face a pair of tax hikes that were enacted as part of the Patient Protection and Af

5、fordable Care Act of 2010 (PPACA) that may shape tax planning strategies for some clients. </p><p>　　In addition, some observers believe that it's only a matter of time before efforts to chip away at the

6、 national debt and narrow the federal budget gap will include calling on higher earners to increase their share of the national tax. </p><p>　　"The Obama Administration has made $200,000 in income for i

7、ndividuals and $250,000 for married couples the new definition of 'rich' in America," CFP®, chief planning officer for spiriting, the San Francisco-based wealth management firm. Those income levels were

8、 proposed as the cut-off point above which taxpayers would not benefit from any extension of the Bush tax cuts.</p><p>　　Health Reform's Tax Bite </p><p>　　Those same income levels were incl

9、uded in PPACA. Specifically, the health reform law adds nearly 1 percent to the employee portion of the Medicare payroll tax for higher income taxpayers, bringing the total to 1.45 percent (up from 0.9 percent), notes Ru

10、ssell Hall, a senior consultant for Towers Watson, an international compensation and human resource strategy consulting firm. In addition, unearned income of those same taxpayers will be subject to a 3.8 percent Medicare

11、 surtax in 2013, Hall says</p><p>　　Another important tax planning consideration is the consensus opinion that preferential tax treatment for long-term capital gains will remain embedded in the Internal Reve

12、nue Code, even if the maximum rate rises significantly above today's 15 percent ceiling. </p><p>　　But even after the fog obscuring future capital gains and ordinary income tax rates lifts in Washington,

13、 planners will rely on analytical skills and reject rules of thumb to steer their clients toward the most tax efficient wealth accumulation tactics and strategies. For example, planners are evaluating the trade-off betwe

14、en the value of deferring income in a tax-sheltered savings vehicle and paying taxes on income currently (versus an assumed higher future rate). </p><p>　　John honey, CFF®, Financial Advisors, was spinn

15、ing out scenarios for corporate executive clients when it appeared highly probable that top earners would be facing a 39.6 percent top federal bracket beginning in 2011, versus 35 percent in 2010. </p><p>　　

16、"Suppose a married executive [with family taxable income exceeding</p><p>　　$250,000] had the option of taking a $100,000 bonus in 2010, or deferring it until 2013," he suggests. If the executive l

17、et that $100,000 gather notional interest at 4 percent annually in a nonqualified deferred compensation plan, it would grow to $112,486 in three years, Hoch says. But the combination of an assumed 39.6 percent basic marg

18、inal tax rate beginning in 2011 plus the higher Medicare tax rates that kick in two years afterward would leave that executive with only $63,667 after the fede</p><p>　　Focus on Executives</p><p&g

19、t;　　Corporate executives (with both publicly and privately held companies) like hypothetical client, with access to nonqualified deferred comp plans, equity-based compensation, and other benefits, give planners a variet

20、y of tax planning issues to consider. That is particularly true when the client has sufficient clout with senior corporate leadership to make adjustments to the structure of his or her compensation package. </p>&

21、lt;p>　　"In a nonqualified plan, you [the corporation] can pick and choose anyone you want" to confer benefits, and "you can structure the compensation any way you want," notes Paul Schneider, J.D.

22、</p><p>　　However, as a practical matter, the larger the corporation, the harder it might be for an executive to negotiate a customized, tax-advantaged package. "The larger companies tend to operate on

23、general principles, so it makes it difficult to draw up different plans for different executives. And the administrative factors become more of a factor than anything else," Schneider says. </p><p>　　St

24、ill, that doesn't mean that executives shouldn't try to negotiate the most favorable compensation arrangements possible, he adds. </p><p>　　For executives with public companies, equity-based compensa

25、tion schemes are, of course, a critical element of the capital accumulation game plan and present different tax-planning challenges and opportunities. </p><p>　　The general expectation that long-term capital

26、 gains will be taxed at lower rates than ordinary income "continues to steer executives towards equity-based compensation, even if there may be an element of ordinary income when you start out," Schneider says.

27、 "The long-term prospect of getting capital gain is more attractive than getting deferred compensation in the form of cash."</p><p>　　Stock Option Opportunities </p><p>　　Incentive sto

28、ck options allow their holders to pay long-term capital gains tax rates on the spread between the exercise Price and the market price when they are sold-provided that the executive holds on to the shares for a year from

29、the exercise date, and two years from the date they were granted. </p><p>　　One down-side from the company's point of view, however, is that it can't take a deduction for the value of the employee

30、9;s gain when the ISO are exercised. In addition, because ISO are an element of a qualified plan, they are subject to a host of 1RS restrictions. For example, ISO must be part of a formal, written plan that spells out th

31、e number of shares available for optioning and the kinds of employees eligible to receive ISO. The plan must be approved by the company's shareholders and that a</p><p>　　Some ISO plan restrictions may l

32、imit their applicability to the most senior executives. For example, a $100,000 annual option exercise limit is imposed, based on the market value of the underlying stock on the date the options were granted. Another res

33、triction that might be more problematic for executives of smaller companies is that ISO cannot be issued to employees who own more than 10 percent of the company’s voting stock. </p><p>　　As a result of thos

34、e and other constraints, ISO have been losing appeal in recent years, Schneider says. The more popular alternative, the nonqualified stock option (NQSO), presents different tax planning opportunities and challenges. For

35、example, while corporations can, in theory, issue Noses without restriction, the executive will always pay ordinary income tax on any gains in value of the underlying stock when the options are exercised.</p><

36、p>　　"The question with them is how long to hold the option and take the tax hit at ordinary income tax rates, and then hold on to the stock in hopes of future capital gains."</p><p>　　If the exe

37、cutive defers exercising the options for several years and the stock appreciates significantly, the ultimate tax bite could put the executive far behind where he or she might have wound up by exercising the option early,

38、 then selling the stock with a significant (more moderately taxed) capital gain. </p><p>　　On the other hand, if the client exercises the option relatively soon and pays the tax, only to witness the stock co

39、llapse, he will be kicking himself for not holding on to the option and exercising it if the gain, on an after-tax basis, is adequate to meet a particular financial objective. </p><p>　　"If you're r

40、isk-averse and you want to keep your options open," says Schneider, "you're going to hold on to the options as long as possible until you get close to their expiration." </p><p>　　"A

41、common sense thing to do for the client is to say, 'Okay, if you have you’re your financial goals funded [from other assets], go ahead and hold on to the options longer because it's not going to impact your goals

42、 in the long run. But if you don't yet have enough money for retirement or to pay for college, then you'd better be thinking about taking it off the table." </p><p>　　In analyzing such decisions

43、, though, planners must not overlook the effect of the financial leverage inherent in options, cautions Aspirant’s Gout. "Even if they're taxed at ordinary income rates, the value of the leverage that's invo

44、lved is just incredible," he says.</p><p>　　Scandals' Aftermath</p><p>　　The same valuation issue applies to restricted stock grant programs—an executive compensation tool more favored

45、by many corporations today than stock option grants, for a variety of reasons. One is the lingering memory and heightened shareholder and regulatory scrutiny of corporations following scandals a decade ago, largely attri

46、butable to top executives becoming obsessed by driving up share prices with scant regard to the company's long-term financial health. </p><p>　　While executives covered by restricted stock progra

47、ms are still incentivized to drive up share prices, the reduced leverage of these programs may blunt that motivation to some degree. </p><p>　　In addition, linking executives' share grants to corporate p

48、erformance metrics— so-called "performance share" programs— have also become popular, notes Charles Steele, CFP®, of SFG Wealth Planning Services Inc. An example of a typical performance formula offered by

49、 Steele: earnings per share growth averaging 8 percent annually over the next three years. </p><p>　　"There is more risk to the executive" since the heyday of whopping options grants, Steele says.

50、</p><p>　　Restricted stock is typically less attractive than options from the executive's point of view, explains Schneider, because in addition to lacking the leverage benefit of options, the value of r

51、estricted stock is immediately taxable at ordinary income tax rates when the shares vest. (Any subsequent appreciation on company stock held by the executives after the shares vest would be taxed as capital gains.) </

52、p><p>　　However, one potential tax-saving tool is available to executives covered by restricted stock programs, according to Cyndi Trotsky, CFP®, CPA/PFS, of Bandai Wealth Advisors. "If they haven'

53、;t vested yet, there is an election they can make called an 83(b) election," she says.</p><p>　　Accelerating Taxes</p><p>　　By making the 83(b) election, the executive is taxed on the value

54、 of the restricted shares at that time. If the taxpayer is confident the market value of those shares will appreciate, the purpose of making the election is paying the ordinary income on a lower amount than (in theory) w

55、ould be the case when the shares are vested. </p><p>　　Also, if higher ordinary income tax rates are assumed for the future, the benefits of such an election could be increased. Finally, the one-year holding

56、 period requirement for long-term capital gains rates would start sooner than if the executive waited until vesting occurs, giving him or her more flexibility in the timing of taking long-term gains upon sale of the stoc

57、k.</p><p>　　But as Trotsky points out, there are also risks to making an 83(b) election. For example, if the executive left the company before vesting in the stock, she would have paid taxes on stock she wou

58、ld never receive. And, as in the case of the early exercise of stock options, if the stock's value drops, the tax paid would be excessive. </p><p>　　Finally, as with any decision that involves having to

59、surrender cash, personal cash flow considerations might outweigh the value of the potential tax savings, Trotsky says</p><p>　　Real Estate Strategy</p><p>　　Executives in smaller company setting

60、s may have some other tax planning opportunities to consider. E. Martin Davidoff, J.D., CPA (and former president of the Association of Attorney-Certified Public Accountants), suggests one: "Suppose the owners of th

61、e company want to buy an office building for the company," he says. "They may let a key employee buy a 5 percent interest in the building, and lend the employee the money with a nine-year balloon payment after

62、nine years, at a low interest rate to </p><p>　　The hoped-for result: A significant long-term gain when the building is sold. "You give opportunities that are tax-leveraged to people," Davidoff say

63、s. </p><p>　　Other tax-planning opportunities may be open to executives through maximizing certain employee benefits. Trotsky points out that long-term Care insurance, for example, can be provided on a selec

64、tive basis to executives (and also cover their spouses) without triggering a requirement that it be provided to all employees.</p><p>　　Source: Richard F.Stolz, 2010. “Tax planning for uncertain times: oppor

65、tunities, flexibility, and the long view” .financial planning, vol.28, no.5, November, pp.24-30.</p><p><b>　　譯文：</b></p><p>　　不確定時期的可變性給付稅收籌劃：機會，靈活性，以及長遠性</p><p>　　在美國國會

66、政治權利即將期滿時，他們努力推出了所謂的“布什減稅”。金融理財師都努力為他們的當事人創(chuàng)造長期或者短期的稅收籌劃機會。同時，當 “財富大廈計劃”提出時，籌劃人員還鼓勵他們的當事人對收益確認進行衡量。</p><p>　　不管華盛頓國會關于稅率增減的思想斗爭如何劇烈，到2013年，高收入者將要面臨一系列的稅收上漲，這些法規(guī)是作為“病患保護與平價醫(yī)療法案”的一部分頒發(fā)的，這一變動也將使一些籌劃人員的稅收籌劃更富戰(zhàn)略性。

67、</p><p>　　從華盛頓聯(lián)邦當前關于邊際所得稅率的爭議可以看出，收入較高的人士將要面臨的都是加稅，這被作為2010（PPACA）醫(yī)療法的一部分予以頒布，這也可能會讓有些管理者改變稅收籌劃策略。 </p><p>　　此外，一些觀察家認為，這只是他們?yōu)榱嗽趽Q屆選舉前使國際債務減少及削減國際赤字的一種手段，他們想以此鼓勵更多的高收入階層購買國稅局的股票。</p><p

68、>　　“奧巴馬政府對‘富有’的解釋為個人收入在200000美元，已婚夫婦為250000美元”舊金山財富管理公司的金融理財師兼首席策劃人員說道。提出最低收入水平對于納稅人來說不會從新頒布的“布什減稅”里獲得好處。</p><p>　　國際知名人力資源戰(zhàn)略公司的羅塞爾說，這一收入水平也在病患保護與平價醫(yī)療法案中被提到過。具體來說，醫(yī)療改革法增加了接近1%的部分對高收入階層的醫(yī)療保險薪金稅進行規(guī)定，使得對于這方面

69、的規(guī)定增加到總體部分的1.45%（比以前增加了0.9%）。另外他還說，這些高收入階層的納稅人的非薪金收入在2013年將適用于醫(yī)療保險附加稅的3.8%的稅率。</p><p>　　另一個被普遍認可的需要著重考慮的稅收籌劃是關于長期資本收益的稅收優(yōu)惠政策，關于長期資本收益的稅收優(yōu)惠政策將在國內(nèi)稅收法規(guī)中提出，這一稅率將會有很大程度的上升，甚至會超過如今的15%的最高限制。</p><p>　　

70、但是在華盛頓極具迷惑性的未來資本收益以及普通的低收益稅率過后，華盛頓未來普通收入的稅率將會上升，稅收籌劃人員可以依靠他們的分析技能讓他們的當事人獲得更多的節(jié)稅收益，他們的當事人將獲得更多的財富積累以及極富戰(zhàn)略性的方案。例如，稅收籌劃人員會在利用稅收庇護工具以及立即納稅（預計未來稅率會上漲）間進行權衡。</p><p>　　財務顧問約翰為他們公司經(jīng)理做出了一個積極的稅收籌劃策略，他鼓勵他們經(jīng)理盡早對收入進行確認并進

71、行納稅，2010年的稅率是35%，他預計2011年以后稅率很可能會達到39.6%。</p><p>　　“假如一個已婚人士 [ 家庭的應稅收入超過25萬美元]可以選擇在2010年獲得10萬美元的獎金，或者將它推遲到2013年”他說?！叭绻x擇在2010年取得，納稅后剩下的有65000美元的純收入”可以用來投資。如果他將10萬美元進行籌劃并獲得每年4%的利息，10萬美元將在三年里增至112486美元”霍克說。“但

72、是依據(jù)預計的2013年39.6%的稅率就將只有63667美元，他在2010年繳納稅費并將獲得的錢用來投資，他將得到更多的錢?！彼偨Y道。</p><p><b>　　聚焦于管理者</b></p><p>　　公司高管（無論是上市公司還是非上市公司）比如霍克斯溫德都喜歡雇傭一個稅收籌劃人員，因為他們有權對公司的事務做出決策，公司會給他們以股票形式的分紅（股票股利），同時

73、他們還有可以獲得其他形式的收益，這就給他們帶來了一些列的稅收籌劃問題需要考慮。但這也需要一個前提就是他們有公司足夠的高層權力來調(diào)整他們公司的薪資以及福利政策。</p><p>　　稅務代理人保羅.施耐德說道：“為了獲得稅收籌劃利益，需要選擇一個有較高質(zhì)量保證的方案。你（公司）可以選則你想要的任何一個有利的稅收籌劃方案，你可以根據(jù)意愿改變公司內(nèi)部結構。”</p><p>　　然而，有一個實際

74、問題需要考慮，公司越大，對于管理者來說制定一個獲取稅收優(yōu)惠的系統(tǒng)就越難。施耐德說：“較大的公司大多都運用普通的納稅籌劃規(guī)則，所以，領導者要根據(jù)不同的狀況制定不同的稅收籌劃政策是很難的，而且，大公司的不確定性因素相對于其他任何小公司而言都要多?！?lt;/p><p>　　他補充到，當然，這也并不意味著大公司的管理者們無法制定有效的稅收籌劃策略。</p><p>　　對于工業(yè)制企業(yè)的管理者而言，企

75、業(yè)的股權配送計劃當然是資本積累計劃的一個關鍵因素，同時也是一次重大挑戰(zhàn)。</p><p>　　一般情況下，管理者都能使長期資本收益比普通中短期收益繳納更低稅率的稅費“繼續(xù)增加公司對管理者的股票股利分派，哪怕開始的時候它是作為一個普通中短期收益入賬的”施耐德說“企業(yè)的長期獲利能力比當前的現(xiàn)金收益更重要”。</p><p><b>　　股票選擇權</b></p>

76、;<p>　　在計算長期資本收益稅費是，有效益地對股票進行稅收籌劃，持有者應在股票的公允價值以及實際價值之間進行權衡以達到繳稅最少的目的，管理者可以在取得股票的那一年里繳納稅款，當然，如果條件允許的情況下，在取得股票的第二年進行納稅也是可以的。</p><p>　　從公司管理層的角度向下來看，問題在于，按照國際標準的規(guī)定不能從會計入賬方面對員工的薪資發(fā)放時間進行隨意的改動。此外，由于國際標準的特點之

77、一就是具有描述性，所以他們也受限制于美國國會的相關規(guī)定。例如，國際標準文件必須是有正式書面計劃，規(guī)定股東選擇股份的數(shù)目，并且該計劃必須經(jīng)該公司的股東許可。</p><p>　　有些按照國際標準制定的納稅條款可能只適用于企業(yè)高管。例如，關于期權的限制就是比較嚴格的，按照股票的市場價值，并且每年行使10萬美元的期權就是對企業(yè)高管的限制。這個納稅條款對于對小型公司而言可能會更麻煩，擁有超過公司10萬美元的股票表決權的普

78、通員工是不適合這個條款的。 施耐德說，由于各種條件的影響，某些形式的投資方式漸漸失去影響力，比較受歡迎的是股票期權，它可以給管理者帶來不同的稅收籌劃的機會和挑戰(zhàn)。例如，公司可以在理論上不受任何限制地發(fā)行股票期權，當可以選擇發(fā)行優(yōu)先股的情況下，管理者將會選擇將一些利得作為普通的中短期收益進行納稅。</p><p>　　霍克斯溫德說：“需要考慮的是，我們應該持有期權到什么時候兌現(xiàn)，確保在較低的稅率情況下繳稅

79、，持有理想的股票并且在將來獲取資本收益?！?lt;/p><p>　　如果股票的持有者選擇在幾年內(nèi)長時間地持有股票，等到有一個好價錢的時候選擇把它拋掉，即便是在這個時候遇上了需要繳納較高的稅收，這對于投資者來說，也只不過是微不足道的一筆開銷。</p><p>　　另一方面，霍克斯溫德指出：“如果股票持有者選擇很快拋掉股票就只是為了在稅率較低時繳納稅款，當股票價格下跌時，他不會有遺憾，但當股票價格

80、上漲時，他將遭受一定的損失并且無能為力?！?lt;/p><p>　　“如果你厭惡風險，你要保持你的選擇的余地，”施奈德說，“你要堅持持有，直到它們快要到期才將它們拋掉。” </p><p>　　霍克斯溫德補充說：“一個客戶說了一個常識性的問題，好的，如果你可以從你的其他資產(chǎn)為你的理財目標提供資金，你可以繼續(xù)持有股票，因為它不會影響你的長遠目標。但是如果你還沒有足夠的錢養(yǎng)老或支付上大學，那么你最

81、好還是將一直擱置的股票賣掉吧?！?lt;/p><p>　　“不過，對這些問題作出分析，籌劃者在作出股票持有或者拋售的選擇時，一定不能忽視財務杠桿的作用，即使在普通的稅率情況下，如果涉及到杠桿效益總體數(shù)值的變化也是不可思議，”他說。</p><p>　　由于很多方面的因素，在同種資金條件下，許多公司在今天更青睞的是股票期權。公司十年前為提高股東資本權益以及監(jiān)督管理權利，高管層不顧公司長遠利益，哄

82、抬公司股票價格，這使公司遭受了極大損失。</p><p>　　當高管層期望公司股價上漲的同時，也應該考慮哄抬股價的行為是否有正確，這樣做是否有利于公司的長遠利益，應該看到這樣可能會在一定程度上造成杠桿效益的下降。 此外，將管理人員的股票持有份額與企業(yè)業(yè)績指標相聯(lián)系就是所謂的“績效股”方案，也已成為流行，擁有CFP®資格的查爾斯斯蒂格說道，一個典型例子是斯蒂格提供的業(yè)績評價規(guī)則：在未來的三年里每股

83、平均增加3%的盈利。 “對于執(zhí)行者來說這會有更多的風險，”自從自由選擇期權達到鼎盛時期的時候，斯蒂格說。</p><p>　　斯卡爾德及時道，從管理者的角度來看限制性股票的吸引力通常很大程度上小于期權性質(zhì)的股票，因為除了缺乏財務杠桿效益以外，限制性股票還須繳納普通稅率形式下的稅額（不管公司的股票是否應該以長期資本收益的形式進行納稅）。</p><p>　　然而，一個潛在的節(jié)稅工具

84、可由限制性的股票轉(zhuǎn)換而來，擁有CFP®認證、注冊會計師辛迪對對財富顧問比奈德說：“如果他們現(xiàn)在還沒有進行納稅，參考 83（b）納稅條款是一個極好的選擇。” 加快納稅</p><p>　　通過參考83（b）條款，管理者可以對納稅作出籌劃。如果納稅人相信這些股票的市場價值將升值，納稅人可以繼續(xù)持有股票，最后在合適的時候拋掉，但需要注意的是收益的確認時間不能是在稅率較高的時候。</p>

85、<p>　　另外，如果確信稅率在將來會更高，選擇提前行使期權將會增加收益。最后，為期一年的股票期權應在期權到期之前確認，以長期資本利得的利率進行納稅計算，同時盡量保持在時間上具有較大的靈活性以及可改變性。</p><p>　　但正如吐沃思克指出，參考 83（b）條款可能會有風險。例如，如果當事人選擇股票股利發(fā)放之前離開公司，他有可能已經(jīng)支付了股票股利應納稅款，但他永遠得不到收益。而且，在行使股票期權提前

86、的情況下，如果股票的價值下降，繳納的稅款將很高。</p><p>　　最后，吐沃思克說，任何一個決定都會涉及資金支付的問題，有足夠的資金以支付稅收是應該考慮的問題，這個問題大于獲取潛在節(jié)稅收益。</p><p><b>　　真正的戰(zhàn)略性決策</b></p><p>　　小公司的管理人員可能還會有其他的稅收籌劃機會需要考慮。注冊會計師（授權委托者

87、，注冊會計師協(xié)會前會長），法學博士馬丁大衛(wèi)杜夫提出一個建議：“假如公司擁有者要為該公司購買一幢辦公大樓，”他說。 “他們可以讓雇員出資大樓購買金額的5%，這樣可以激勵日后員工在公司日常經(jīng)營方面的積極性，且應在低利息率的時候購買辦公大樓。”</p><p>　　希望得到的結果是，當該建筑物出售時，可以作為公司一項巨大的資本收益入賬?！澳憧梢宰屍渌双@得財務杠桿效應，當然，你也可以得到，”大衛(wèi)杜夫說。 </p&