Lee B

I found several updated PTC calculators and even with MFJ 300,000 of AGI you qualify for enough PTC to reduce the second lowest cost Silver Plan to an out of pocket cost of $ 0. So, I humbly apologize, you were right!

While this change would dramatically expand the number of taxpayers eligible to receive the PTC, there are still limitations. For example, I recently finished a tax return for a couple MFJ with 2 kids, spouse received $ 2,710 Unemployment. However their AGI was almost $ 200,000, with that income, even with this liberal change in the rules, they don't qualify to receive the PTC.

Copied from from the Health Affairs blog: https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20210311.725837/full/ "The American Rescue Plan creates a “special rule” regarding PTC eligibility for those who receive unemployment compensation during 2021. If someone receives (or is approved to receive) unemployment benefits during 2021, their income will be treated as no higher than 133 percent of the FPL. This means that those who receive unemployment benefits can receive maximal subsidies for ACA coverage, including no-premium coverage." Tom, I don't think they get it for free, but it's a very liberal interpretation of the FPI limit. According to this blog, there were a lot of changes in this area which significantly expands the eligibility to receive the PTC and the APTC.

yes

Actually, I don' think the IRS has issued issued guidance on this yet. Hold your breath, film at 11.

Hopefully, your client just got traditional IRA sand the Roth IRA confused.

Based on your post, I tentatively assume the employer is paying 50% and the employee is having 50% withheld from their paycheck, in which case, the employee share is being paid pre tax.

This is approaching the classic definition of a "Dumpster Fire"

Copied from the current Federal Tax Development Blog: "As a tax adviser, you may have recently installed a tax software update to take into account the unemployment compensation exclusion for 2020 passed as part of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 and found at IRC §85(c). Now it turns out that, due to an IRS change of heart on how to read IRC §85(c)(2)(B), your software may now be subjecting unemployment to tax the IRS has now decided is not to be subject to such tax. On March 12, 2021, the IRS provided updated instructions on their website for preparing returns that have excludable unemployment compensation.[1] However, on March 23, 2021 the IRS made a significant change in those instructions.[2] Originally the IRS instructions had taxpayers include the unemployment compensation in determining the modified AGI (reading “without regard to this section” in IRC §85(c)(2)(B) to mean without regard to the exclusion at IRC §85(c)) but now they have decided that means without regard to any unemployment compensation covered by §85" Are you kidding me When they first released the Instructions, I pulled up Page 1 of Form 1040, Schedule ! of Form 1040 and the newly published instructions and carefully followed them line by line and this was the exact result that I arrived at! Then the next day when the tax software providers started releasing their UCE worksheets, the total UC was included in the MAGI. Now it isn't included in MAGI! Whoa Nelly! At this rate there wan't even be a close second for Most Confusing Tax Season!!!

Getting a "Qualified Appraisal " right now may be both difficult and expensive.

According to several news articles, both the NCCPAP and the AICPA are pushing hard to get the IRS to extend the deadline for all forms and payments from April 15th to June 15th. They are saying the extension to May 17th wasn't very helpful, since it excluded Trusts, Corporations and all 1040 taxpayers who need to make quarterly estimated payments. I agree that at the very least the deadline extension to May 17th should have included all form and all payments. It didn't really help me since almost all of my returns are business related.

Yes, I ran into the same issue with Drake several days ago.

The only thing I can add is that there are a number of Tax Court Cases in this area, that really get in the facts & circumstances detail. Based on three sentences, there isn't any way to know?

I have been working on 1st and 2nd PPP Loan applications. Switching gears tomorrow to forgiveness applications; None forgiven yet. The 10 month forgiveness application deadline is approaching for the very earliest loans. Any loan not forgiven has the option not to start repayments for 12 months. ( Originally was 6 months ) I don't know why anyone would be starting repayments yet unless they were doing so voluntarily.

Under this Cares Act program the SBA made 6 monthly payments directly to the loan servicing agents beginning with either April or May's payment. Normally the loan servicing agent debited my clients bank account monthly for the loan payment. ( Note: this was a loan my client obtained over 10 years ago!) So during 2020 , my client made 6 payments and the SBA made 6 payments. My client received a letter informing her of the program. last spring. My client received another letter about a month ago informing her that she could request 3 more months of payments this year as as extended by the CAA The tax status was clarified sometime last fall.

If you just mean "directly affected" then you are correct , however the resulting change in a taxpayer's AGI or MAGI potentially affects other credits phase outs etc etc

???

One would hope this would be an easy question. Unfortunately, both the TCJA and the CARES Act both changed the NOL Rules and the intersection of the two gets complicated. Excellent article in the J of A:j journalofaccountancy.com/issues/2020/nov/deducting-losses-cares-act-coronavirus-relief.html

I would not answer this question, yes. i believe the context of this question is about forgiveness of loans which trigger Other Income that is taxable. As we have discussed in other threads, I would handle this as an M-1 adjustment.

I have client who had 6 monthly payments paid on her behalf by the SBA on her Loan due to the Cares Act. It was later clarified that the 6 payments are not taxable and the related interest paid on the SBA Loan is deductible. Its all good

Drake has a very useful knowledgebase article about the current status of the taxation of unemployment benefits in all 50 states.

My understanding is based on a long presentation and discussion at in all day CPE class sponsored by the OSCPA is that if the error/mistake occurs two years in a row that creates an incorrect method which can corrected by a 3115. If the error/mistake is a one off (happens once ) then that is corrected by an amended return. It doesn't matter why the depreciation errors occurred, the fact they did occur and were repeated creates a method which can be corrected with a 3115. In the presentation, correction of depreciation was used several times in examples. By the way the presenter was the Chairman of the AICPA Taxation Committee.

I was going through documents a long time client dropped off, when it suddenly registered on my brain that I was seeing a new address on some of the husband's tax docs. So I called him and asked whether they are perhaps separated? He says, yes but we weren't at the end of the year. Then I look at the engagement letter and the spouse's signature amazingly looked like his writing. I already knew that this guy wasn't the most truthful client I had. So that's it! I'm done, returning his documents back to him. In 28 years, I have dealt with divorced clients only once. That experience convinced me to never do that again. The risk reward relationship of dealing with divorced clients is not very good.

Discussion thread with a lot of hypothetical ideas and a significant lack of substantive facts. Assuming this client lives in MO, the state of the poster, more than likely state law will be the determining factor in how this all ends up.

If you help them set up a "Secure Access" account, they can set up their own payment plan. Of course you might have coach them through it, but it would be much easier and way quicker.