michaelmars

i always file, and in this case you have depr deductions etc to carry over correctly.

double check, the Insolvency might be at the partnership level. Its been years since i had anything similar but that sticks in my head.

Depending on when you were hired, NYC taxes some employees as iff they were residents, this is the 1127 tax. they get a separate w-2 which shows this as withheld. If you take it on sch a as a deduction there is a NY adustment to itemized expenses for this. Usually filing joint is best but you can elect single for this form only. When collating, watchout for the attachments they ask for.

AND he will tell them he mailed it with all his other w-2's and must be lost in the mail or he has a wrong address, the employee is welcome to pick up a copy!

KEN, IF YOU WANT CALL ME, ITS EASIER TO EXPLAIN ON PHONE, still have my number?

Help! i am filing 2009 and 2010 for a decedents estate. 2009 had excess deductions and this seems to carry over to 2010 as an NOL. in 2010 the estate is closed and final and i can't figure out if this amount should flow to the K-1 as excess deductions or as NOL. If excess ded, where do i imput this, i can not figure it out.

I love seeing Heinlein fans. the 15 people i work with never heard of him - neanderthals one and all!

Of course since we can assume that daughter has a married name and mom has a different last name, who's to know that they are related anyway? @<@ hmm [looking over shoulder] who said that?

IF parents and son are both married you can reduce the gift to 50k from the lifetime exclusion

which makes no sense, the regs say you must pay fica if you are poor divorse, widow or have a disabled spouse, but if you are married and without these problems you can avoid paying fica. Our tax code is nuts! i learned this today about an hour before this thread

NO, BUT everyone here is going to now!

I know why you might want to have all items designated but why should there be diagnostics on sch d but not on sch b, just a programming snafu imho

Anyone know why we have to put filer or spouse in for stock sales but not for int or div? just an annoying diagnostic to keep getting.

or do a "schedule available upon request" and just enter the long and short totals. Make sure the gross sales are reported to tie out to the 1099-b. and don't tell Bees Knees since this is not technically correct either. I have done this for 20 years even before efiling and only once got asked for the back up by a state not even feds. i have had 1099's over 200 pages for some managed funds in trusts, its crazy.

bump

Interesting topic, but i go with Old Jack, if nothing else, in being equitable. Now if your spouse is MIA how can you even know of you can itemize or must take standard deduction? I think constructive abandonment comes to play here. In one of the cases above the person didn't even know if their spouse was still alive, hence MFS might be wrong too. I'd go substance over form and on the rare chance of it happening, i'd deal with it on audit. On the other hand, if the irs says the spouse filed as mfs and thus you must too, congratulations, you can now find the person for child support and/or alimony.

I'll think about this tomorrow, i already used up todays allotment

correct, many professions show losses for many years, ie authors, actors etc, real estate can be losses until the mortgage is paid or the depreciation is ended. Now with the 100% depr w/o of sec 179 losses are becoming common [or break evens.

Having an ongoing payroll tax audit for year 2005. Ct wants to reclassify the 1099's as employees. We had the audit and then the agent disappeared only to resurface last week requesting a conference. Just wondering if this is now a closed year for CT purposes.

i too just say "from prior year" duh

don't know all the paramaters but, with sec 179 doesn't really make a difference

expense

WE had a few of these audits and as bcollen says, just show they are a new client to you and you got them on a reasonable p/r for 2011. So far 3 were no problem and on the 4th the agent appied the same pr we has for the following year for the audit year and didn't go further back. She didn't even question the amount.

i think i would amend-after 4/15 of course

i am not going to deal with it until after 4/15.