Lynn EA USTCP in Louisiana

New client came in today for an extension. Among the papers was a k-1 from an irrevocable trust set up by taxpayer's late grandfather, with Massachusetts k-1. I may need some assistance from Catherine in early May.

My most amazing client story is that of an almost 30 y/0 son of a deceased doctor. His dad had set up trust funds for the TP, overseen by the TP's uncle. Trust terminated last year and TP now in charge of managing his $. His tax docs , received last week, reflected IRA distiprivutioms, code 4, of about $200,000 and not one dime of withholding. I asked him what was he thinking tomwhich he replied he didn't consult with his mom because his uncle had already tried to talk him out of withdrawing the $. He never thought to call me beforehand. He now works as a police officer in a small podunk louisiana town.

NY Has a NY k-1 entry form. Does NJ too ??

JKLCPA ! Thank you for the nomination, CATHERINE for the second. My head is still spinning over these issues. I like your term, CATHERINE, legis-vermin. Oddly enough, the legislative attorney contacted the LA EA Society for our input on two bills being introduced next week to regulate tax preparers in Louisiana.

ATX just pushed out an update to this form - I'll have to check it to see if it cured my ills. Maybe this post could qualify me for the Tax Star of the week, don't ya'll think ??? !!!

The state legislature is to blame for these frickin' issues, which complicates what used to be a reasonably easy return to complete, 4 pages. This return is now 17 pages long!! My eyes cross trying to complete one without problems; tackling these with the legislature mandated limitations is so aggravating.

Illmas the support will be the client's copy of the check they received and their paperwork showing they rolled the money into an IRA within the 60 day window. Also, the respective 5498's.

I am home now so cannot pull up a 1099R in the program. Look at 1099R input in the program, line 2. Isn't there a box to check on line 2 to enter the amount in box 2 that was rolled over ?

I have a Louisiana corporate return to complete. The company is an electrical contractor and eligible for the DPAD deduction. They are currently on the accrual basis (and will be reverting to cash basis for 2018). There are NOL CF to use against 2017 net income, not fully extinguishing federal taxable income. On the state corporate return the NOL CF is used against 72% of the 2017 net income, and there are ACT 123 adjustments to deduct 1/3 of the prior year's unused NOL. Federal taxable income (before the NOL CF) is $334,567 CIFT 620, page 1, line 1A shows LA net income $343,441 (higher than federal income by the act amount of the DPAD deduction of $8,874) Schedule D lines 27, 27, 28 and 30 net income are also the same as page 1, line 1A $343,441 Schedule F line 1 agrees with the federal net income of $334,567. We have to add back the LA income tax paid in 2017 of $1,490 which results in schedule F line 4 of $336,057, which does not agree with schedule D line 25. Regarding the Act 123 adjustments, CIT 620-, page 1, line 1C2 deduction is $46,023 (1/3 of the unused NOL) Instructions say to also list Act 123 recovery on Schedule F line H. If I do that, then schedule F line 4 will again not agree with schedule D line 25. Cathy in Louisiana, or anyone else doing Louisiana corporate returns, are you finding problems with these calculations? Thanks, Lynn

It is ready, including page 2

Today's email from a client let me know my fax line was out of order, I called the fax and indeed the line went to a recording, 'the number you have dialed is unavailable , etc.'. I called ATT support and they answered. Within 40 minutes the fax line was working again. So, I let the client know and she went to Home Depot to send the fax (hers at home is broken). Second email stated the same as her first - the line is out of order. I called the fax number and the fax attempted to connect. I again let her know the line is working and confirmed the number. whereupon she said they tried several times without success. No idea what is going on but my guess is it's a combination of issues . Now I am home waiting for the landscaper to go over her plan for my gardens that died in the January freezes.

With that many, it is reasonable to do a total per casino source.

The $6k he receives in 2017 is capital gain. Yeah. The $9k loss in 2016 is ordinary income reduction.

Yes

Oh - thank you. I missed that part. "now with egg on her face" !!!

From what I read of the bill windows were not included. SEC. 40402. Extension and modification of credit for residential energy property. (a) In general.—Section 25D(h) is amended by striking “December 31, 2016” and all that follows and inserting “December 31, 2021.”. (b) Phaseout.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 25D(a) is amended by striking “the sum of—” and all that follows and inserting “the sum of the applicable percentages of— “(1) the qualified solar electric property expenditures, “(2) the qualified solar water heating property expenditures, “(3) the qualified fuel cell property expenditures, “(4) the qualified small wind energy property expenditures, and “(5) the qualified geothermal heat pump property expenditures, made by the taxpayer during such year.”. (2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 25D(g) is amended by striking “paragraphs (1) and (2) of”. (c) Effective date.—The amendment made by this section shall apply to property placed in service after December 31, 2016.

5695 ; yes

Cathy, I guess I'm not understanding your dilemma. Act 375 d/c'd the $18 credit for 2017, stated that for 2016 it was either the $18 credit OR the tuition deduction. Repeat of 47:297(D)(2) does away with the $18 credit altogether. What am I missing in your quandary?

The excess scholarship is shown as income on the child's tax return.

Cathy, remember in prior years LDR (on behalf of the state legislature) offered both an education CREDIT and a school/tuition DEDUCTION. Up until (I think) the 2016 tax year taxpayers could take BOTH, if they had qualifying children and expenses. For 2016 the legislature changed the rules so that taxpayers could take the measly $18 (reduced from the prior $25) credit OR the (up to) $5,000 school/tuition deduction. New for 2017 the legislature has removed the measly $18 credit and left taxpayers only the option of the (up to) $5,000 school/tuition deduction. Does this help? Lynn

Cathy, I will re-read this in the next few days. I will also send an inquiry to Barbara reeves, LDR Tax Practitioner Liaison, to see if she has any other comments on this issue,. Remember for 2016 those with children had a choice, either the $25 (then $18) credit, OR the school tuition deduction. So the legislature appears to have left in place the tuition deduction and removed the minuscule credit. I went to the LDR Practitioner meeting in BR Alastair November -'I will also check those materials for comments on this.

Start your research with Pension Protection Act of 2006 and IRS Notice 2007-50. There are volumes of Tax Court cases regarding conservation easement contributions which ultimately, per the Tax Court rulings, failed. Lots of rules to be followed to be successful.

I have one client with PMI noted on their 1098 from Wells Fargo. While most years she calls every day about the status of her return. This year I have to give her credit for being patient as we await the software updates.

Isn't this done via form 5329?

IRS projected date is 2/22