Part IV. Items — Internal Revenue Bulletin 1999-52

Foundations Status of Certain Organizations

Announcement 99–115

Lo Society Branch of Wisconsin Inc,

Oshkosh, WI MPA Foundation, New York, NY Neighborhood Network Inc., Uniontown,

only,” which were erroneous. The court cases are listed below, followed by the footnotes with the correct text.

The Commisioner ACQUIESCES in the following decisions:

The following organizations have failed to establish or have been unable to maintain their status as public charities or as operating foundations. Accordingly, grantors and contributors may not, after this date, rely on previous rulings or designations in the Cumulative List of Organizations (Publication 78), or on the presumption arising from the filing of notices under section 508(b) of the Code. This listing does not indicate that the organizations have lost their status as organizations described in section 501(c)(3), eligible to receive deductible contributions.

Former Public Charities. The following organizations (which have been treated as organizations that are not private foundations described in section 509(a) of the Code) are now classified as private foundations: A & M Nutrition, Incorporated,

PA SGV Property Management,

Service, Inc., Los Angeles, CA If an organization listed above submits information that warrants the renewal of its classification as a public charity or as a private operating foundation, the Internal Revenue Service will issue a ruling or determination letter with the revised classification as to foundation status. Grantors and contributors may thereafter rely upon such ruling or determination letter as provided in section 1.509(a)–7 of the Income Tax Regulations. It is not the practice of the Service to announce such revised classification of foundation status in the Internal Revenue Bulletin.

Vulcan Materials Company and Sub- sidiaries v. Commissioner, ⁵

96 T.C. 410 (1991) St. Jude Medical, Inc. v. Commis- sioner, ⁶

34 F.3d 1394 (8th Cir. 1994) Hospital Corp. of America and Sub- sidiaries v. Commissioner, ⁷

Los Angeles, CA Vision Research Foundation Inc.,

Phoenix, AZ Voters Organized to Educate, Compton,

CA West Tennessee Young Farmers &

Homemakers Leadership Development, Columbia, TN White Collar Crime, Inc., Roseland, NJ Working With Women Transporting

Internal Revenue Service v. Wald- schmidt (In re Bradley), ¹

(M.D. Tenn 1999) Estate of Mellinger v. Commisioner, ²

112 T.C. 4 (1999) Hospital Corp. of America and Sub- sidiaries v. Commissioner, ³

109 T.C. 21 (1997) Boyd Gaming Corporation v. Com- missioner, ⁴

F.3d (9th Cir. 1999)

The Commissioner NONACQUIESCES in the following decisions:

Winnsboro, LA Assist, Inc., Buffalo, NY Children & Youth 2000, c/o Wolin &

109 T.C. 21 (1997)

Rosen, Chicago, IL Colorado Collective for Medical

Decisions, Inc., Denver, CO Friends of the Environment, Sacramento,

CA Glenville Community Festival

Foundation, Cleveland, OH Impact For Change Ministries

Social Security Contribution and Benefit Base for 2000

Under authority contained in the Social Security Act (“the Act”), the Commissioner, Social Security Administration, has determined and announced (64 F.R. 57506, dated October 25, 1999) that the contribution and benefit base for remuneration paid in 1999, and self-employment income earned in taxable years beginning in 2000 is $76,200.

revised action on decision clarifies the Service’s position on this issue in cases appealable to the 11th Circuit. 6Nonacquiescence relating to whether section 1.861–8(e)(3) of the Income Tax Regulations is invalid as applied to DISC combined taxable income (CTI) calculations. 7Nonacquiescence relating to whether certain items treated as tangible personal property and depreciated over a 5-year recovery period were in fact structural components of the buildings to which they relate which must be depreciated over the same recovery period as the buildings, pursuant to I.R.C. §168.

International, Inc. Waldorf, MD Jersey Shore Public Relations &

Advertising Charitable Scholarship Trust, Princeton, NJ Lewis IDA Community Development

Corp, Lowville, NY

1Acquiescence relating to whether gain on the sale of the debtor’s residence is excluded from gross income of the bankruptcy estate to the extent provided by I.R.C. §121 and in accord with section 1398. 2Acquiescence relating to whether, for estate tax valuation purposes, a minority interest in a closely held corporation held in a Qualified Terminable Interest Property (QTIP) trust, which is includible in the gross estate under I.R.C. §2044, is aggregated with a minority interest in the same corporation that is includible in a decedent’s gross estate under other provisions of the Code. 3Acquiescence relating to whether the tests developed under the investment tax credit (ITC) prior to the 1981

Actions on Decisions; Correction

Announcement 99–116

This document corrects the Actions on Decisions published in 1999–35 I.R.B. 314. All 7 footnotes describing the “Acquiescence” or “Nonacquiesence” in each decision included the words “in result

adoption of the cost recovery system are applicable in determining a structural component for the purposes of Accelerated Cost Recovery System (ACRS) and Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System (MACRS). 4Acquiescence relating to whether a meal furnished by the taxpayer/employer on its business premises to an employee is furnished for “the convenience of the employer” within the meaning of that phrase in section 119 of the Internal Revenue Code. 5Nonacquiescence relating to whether the term “accumulated profits” as used in the denominator of the section 902 deemed paid credit fraction before the Tax Reform Act of 1986 means all of a foreign corporation’s accumulated profits for the taxable year. This

1999–52 I.R.B. 763 December 27, 1999

“Old-Law” Contribution and Benefit Base

General

The “old-law” contribution and benefit base for 2000 is $56,700. This is the base that would have been effective under the Act without the enactment of the 1977 amendments. The base is computed under section 230(b) of the Act as it read prior to the 1977 amendments.

The “old-law” contribution and benefit base is used by:

(a) The Railroad Retirement program to determine certain tax liabilities and tier II benefits payable under that program to supplement the tier I payments which correspond to basic Social Security benefits,

(b) The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation to determine the maximum amount of pension guaranteed under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (as stated in section 230(d) of the Social Security Act),

imum benefit, as described earlier, and

(d) Social Security to determine a year of coverage (acquired whenever earnings equal or exceed 25 percent of the “oldlaw” base for this purpose only) in computing benefits for persons who are also eligible to receive pensions based on employment not covered under section 210 of the Act.

Domestic Employee Coverage Threshold

General

Section 2 of the “Social Security Domestic Employment Reform Act of 1994” (Pub. L. 103-387) increased the threshold for coverage of a domestic employee’s wages paid per employer from $50 per calendar quarter to $1,000 per annum in calendar year 1994. The statute held the coverage threshold at the $1,000 level for 1995 and then increased the threshold in $100 increments for years after 1995. Section 3121(x) of the Internal Revenue Code provides the formula for increasing the threshold.

Computation

Under the formula, the domestic employee coverage threshold amount for 2000 shall be equal to the 1995 amount of $1,000 multiplied by the ratio of the national average wage index for 1998 to that for 1993. If the amount so determined is not a multiple of $100, it shall be rounded to the next lower multiple of $100.

Domestic Employee Coverage Threshold Amount

The ratio of the national average wage index for 1998, $28,861.44, compared to that for 1993, $23,132.67, is 1.2476485. Multiplying the 1995 domestic employee coverage threshold amount of $1,000 by the ratio of 1.2476485 produces the amount of $1,247.65, which must then be rounded to $1,200. Accordingly, the domestic employee coverage threshold amount is determined to be $1,200 for 2000.

(Filed by the Office of the Federal Register on October 22, 1999, 8:45 a.m., and published in the issue of the Federal Register for October 25, 1999, 64 F.R. 57506)

December 27, 1999 764 1999–52 I.R.B.