Gail in Virginia

Yes it would increase his tax burden in the year of the seizure/absolution of liability. But he did give up the equipment in exchange for something of value. Interesting question, Edsel. I am not sure if it would be sale on a 4797, or cancellation of debt. And how would this affect the 179 deduction - does some or all of that need to be recaptured since the property is no longer business use? I hope somebody else weighs in on this - you have me wondering now.

Offering different prices to different customers is not at all unusual. Keeping the price differential going forward seems a little unfair - I would have thought they would gradually ease the new customers up to the same price as the old. I have noticed sometimes when I look at something on line but decide not to buy it, the price will drop in a few days to try to get me to pull the trigger. So i hardly ever buy something the first time i look at it online anymore. Sounds like you might need to leave ATX and come back to get the best deal.

And they will continue to be domiciliary residents of NC, I assume, and will therefore continue to file a NC tax return based on their US Tax return. The fact that they are no longer resident in the state of NC will most likely be irrelevant unless they establish residency in another state. Or that used to be the way the states rolled - someone may have better information than I do.

According to Kim Kommando, Edge does not have any major drawbacks but lacks some of the security features and extensions of other browsers. It does open quickly and is kind to system resources. Firefox is supposedly the safer browser, Chrome is more popular but may be sharing information with Google and is a resource hog. I don't know anything much about Vivaldi (Opera) or Tor. If Edge is doing everything you want it to, I would go with it. I am not an expert on browsers however, so don't rely on this information as the final word.

Just remind them it is for the whole calendar year - once they give them the cash they should, technically, be sure to skip any Christmas or birthday gifts since that will put them over the limit if they have already given the max.

I don't think that is what I was saying, Pacun. The instructions for 1099R do say that repayment of the loan is after tax money and creates basis. if the plan does not allow for after tax contributions, I don't think that they should allow you to repay the loan after it is deemed a distribution. If it does allow for after tax contributions, they must have a mechanism for tracking those and I would think they could track this the same way. As far as tracking earnings on that money, I am not sure that matters. Your basis will remain the same, and the earnings, being tax deferred regardless of the source, will be taxable. If this wasn't Roth money to start with, I don't think repaying the loan will change it to Roth money - I would expect it to be just an after tax contribution to a regular 4021(k) or IRA account. But I don't have any kind of citation for that, even an impermissible one like a pub.

From the instructions for Form 1099R regarding loans treated as distributions: Subsequent repayments. If a participant makes any cash repayments on a loan that was reported on Form 1099-R as a deemed distribution, the repayments increase the participant's tax basis in the plan as if the repayments were after-tax contributions. However, such repayments are not treated as after-tax contributions for purposes of section 401(m) or 415(c)(2)(B) If you show them the instructions, do you think they will realize that it does have to be treated as paid with after-tax money?

There might be a step up in basis for the S-corp, but the land was held in a corporation which did not die, so there is no step up in basis on the land itself as I understand it.

I don't envy you, Lion. I think that the sale of the building was reported on the corporate return, and the information on the K-1 gives you the pass through that is reported on the taxpayer's return. The stock in the S Corp, I believe, would be treated the same as any corporation that goes out of business. The sale price is 0, but the real question s what is the basis? And if this is gifted rather than inherited, I have no idea how you will find that out. Can the CPA at least provide a copy of the first return that showed your client on the K-1? That will give you a balance sheet to start from, but no idea really of what the father's basis was....

If he inherited stock in the S-Corp, his basis in the stock would be what it was worth at the time he inherited it. One approach would be what Evan is suggesting, to look at the balance sheet for that year and see what the company was worth at that time. But that does not take into account either intangibles or appreciation of assets, as a rule. Another approach might be to try to locate the inventory for the estate of his father and see what value was used at the time the estate was probated. I don't know if that would be a matter of public record in your state. I don't know if it is in my state. I don't envy you this trying to find this out when your client is unable to help. Does the client have a lawyer or children who might have access to his papers and be able to look for any records?

Or since a rental was involved, do they have a partnership and would a 754 election be required?

It does look like a map for a subway system! I am not sure that I have the patience or the eyesight to work through that mess. Byzantine, at best!

I don't use ATX any more, so I can't speak as to whether there is anything out there that integrates. I have tried a couple of file cabinet softwares over the years. Arkworks went out of business, or got bought out (I don't remember which) so I tried eFile cabinet next. I liked some of the features of the program but as they updated and improved the program I liked it lest and had more problems with it that I just never seemed to find the time to resolve. So i have gone to using the storage space on the server and just organizing files in a windows tree. Not ideal, but at least i don't have to worry about my data being held hostage if I change my subscription.

I think it violates the Sokovia Accords.

Maybe I am missing something, but if husband had negative SE income (less than $00) but wife did not, wouldn't the amount of tax change if the income was moved from him to her? She would be paying SE tax on all of it, as opposed to him paying on the amount above his negative SE earnings.