Skip to main content

Tax Update: Mileage Rates Changed for 2011

The IRS has enhanced mileage reimbursement rates for the second half of 2011 to 55.5 cents for business and 23.5 cents for medical and moving per mile. This is an increase from the first half rate of 51 cents for business and 19 cents for medical and moving per mile.

The full announcement is below. It's nice to get a little help from our friends at the IRS.

To Your Prosperity,

Kevin Kroskey, CFP

======

Optional Standard Mileage Rates 
Announcement 2011-40
 
This announcement informs taxpayers that the Internal Revenue Service is modifying Notice 2010-88, 2010-51 I.R.B. 882, by revising the optional standard mileage rates for computing the deductible costs of operating an automobile for business, medical, or moving expense purposes and for determining the reimbursed amount of these expenses that is deemed substantiated.  This modification results from recent increases in the price of fuel.

The revised standard mileage rates are:
(1) Business = 55.5 cents per mile
(2) Medical and moving = 23.5 cents per mil

The mileage rate that applies to the deduction for charitable contributions is fixed under § 170(i) of the Internal Revenue Code at 14 cents per mile.  The revised standard mileage rates set forth in this announcement apply to deductible transportation expenses paid or incurred for business, medical, or moving expense purposes on or after July 1, 2011, and to mileage allowances that are paid both (1) to an employee on or after July 1, 2011, and (2) for transportation expenses paid or incurred by the employee on or after July 1, 2011.  
The standard mileage rates set forth in Notice 2010-88 continue to apply to deductible transportation expenses paid or incurred for business, medical, or moving expense purposes before July 1, 2011, and to mileage allowances paid (1) to an employee before July 1, 2011, or 2 (2) with respect to transportation expenses paid or incurred by the employee before July 1, 2011.  All other provisions of Notice 2010-88 remain in effect.

Popular posts from this blog

Diversification: Disciplinarian of Disciplinarians

Disciplined diversification works when you do and even when you don't want it to. Diversification in effect forces you to sell the thing that has been doing so well in your portfolio and to buy the thing that hasn't. While this makes rational sense, it is emotionally difficult to execute. Think back to the tail end of 2008--were you selling bonds and cash to buy stocks? Most likely you weren't unless your advisor or some sort of automatic trigger did it for you. Carl Richards of www.behaviorgap.com provided a good reminder of how diversification works in a recent NY Times blog post. The diversification he discusses here is more so related to equity asset-class diversification but also touches on the three basic building blocks--equities, bonds, and cash. He doesn't discuss alternative asset classes -- an asset class that doesn't fit neatly into the three basic categories -- being used to further diversification, but that's a detailed topic for another day. ...

65-80 Year Olds … A New and Exciting Demography

Should today’s 70-year-old American be considered “old?” How do you define that term these days? Statistically, your average 70-year-old has just a 2% chance of dying within a year. The estimated upper limits of average life expectancy is now 97, and a rapidly growing number of 70-year-olds will live past age 100. Perhaps more importantly, today’s 70-year-olds are in much better shape than their grandparents were at the same age. In most developed countries, healthy life expectancy from age 50 is growing faster than life expectancy itself, suggesting that the period of diminished vigor and ill health towards the end of life is being compressed. A recent series of articles in the Economist magazine suggest that we need a new term for people age 65 to 80, who are generally healthy and hearty, capable of knowledge-based work on an equal footing with 25-year-olds, and who are increasingly being shunted out of the workforce as if they were invalids or, well, “old.” Indeed, the a...

Should We Go Back on the Gold Standard?

If you watched the Republican presidential debates, you might have noticed that a number of  candidates yearn for a return to the gold standard—that is, that every dollar issued by the government would be backed by a comparable value in gold bars that were stashed away in a government vault. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas argued that the dollar should have a fixed value in gold, and Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky added that printing money without backing in the precious metal destroys the value of our currency. Mike Huckabee, former governor of Arkansas, thinks that if not gold, then the dollar could be pegged to a basket of commodities. All are mostly concerned that printing money will cause runaway inflation.   But there may be several problems with this return to the fiscal system of the late 1800s and early 1900s. One is that inflation has barely budged even as the Federal Reserve Board was piling one QE stimulus on top of another, and the government was adding records amoun...