BrewOne

I don't do a lot of state taxes and rarely force itemized deductions. Client made a generous donation in her late husband's name but I noticed software picked standard deduction of $15,700--itemized works out to about $15,200 but with a $29,000 charitable carryover. I'm assuming I need to force itemized to maintain the carryover. Es verdad?

I'm thinking of providing mine only when they ask for it, but also providing a list of everything we used on the previous return--this has been the week of the missing form.

started seeing them last year. Not proper, according to instructions for Boxes 1a and 1b (specifically says to include amounts in box 1b in 1a total). The brokers probably just want to keep us on our toes.

frankly I didn't mind pharma reps losing the deduction for their vehicles, or those who were deducting expensive clothes and dry cleaning on Schedule A (I know, they weren't supposed to)...but mechanics weren't in a position to demand their employers compensate them for tools when the law changed.

I used to provide one on request but then I thought about what a litigious society we live in--"you never asked me about selling stuff on Ebay". So I send one out to every client with my annual letter. Also, my client agreement states "I am not responsible for information missing from the return that was not provided to me." Just my effort to CMA.

Best I can see, Notice 2022-53 (under the 10 year rule RMD's must start in 2023) still hasn't been finalized and has been postponed for one year (2024). I would pay close attention if I had advised anyone that they had 10 years to take the money out.

One of my fellow enrolled agents had fraudulent charges on a credit card in his name. He thought he had it all cleared up (around $18k, over half of which was interest charges) but then received a 1099-C for the full amount (which he reported on his return). Not the same thing, but makes me think it might be a tough nut to crack.

It depends on your software, whether or not you can pull down a 1099-K worksheet or have to make a direct entry. The "other adjustment" (negative amount) is a manual entry in my software.

enter "Plan Loan Offsets" in the irs.gov search box for some fun reading--IRC 172(p)-1. My reading of it is that it counts as an actual distribution--combined with Code 1, looks like a penalty as well, IMO.

I was thinking a 25% SEP plan works out to 20% but that may just be for self-employed? Anyway, in trying to verify that, I discovered I may have allowed a client to put too much money into his IRA's--I thought you could contribute to your SEP and an IRA as well. This is correct; however, your total contributions cannot exceed the SEP IRA contribution limits. IRA's are trickier than many folks think. I had a client who would tell me about his Traditional IRA contributions--one year I mentioned Roth's and he said, oh I put $6,000 in my Roth as well but I didn't think I needed to tell you about that. He had been putting the limit into both types for years, what a mess to straighten out. Then the year after he retired, he was still putting money into his IRA... geez

the depletion allowance on oil and gas extraction is a sweetheart deal. Sort of like the QBI deduction.

sorry to hear. So there is no way for you to know if there is any remaining eligibility, but you don't want to claim the AOC and down the road have the client informed by the IRS that they weren't eligible. One possible is if one of those years they were not at least a half-time student for one semester. In that case, the AOC should not have been claimed for that year.

I agree with Lee. Another requirement is that they were still undergraduates at the start of 2023, so that is easy to check. And on a broader note, I wouldn't take a new client without seeing their last return.

sounds fine, as long as you're using $12,600 of it on Form 8853

Wow, something is really off here. If they can show that once they had access to the funds that they rolled them over into an IRA (plus the 10%), they could request a waiver on the 60-day rule. Assuming they don't want the money.

Will the CBRF provide a letter? I have several clients at a full care facility that are given a breakdown, i.e. 17% for assisted living, 100% for the "memory care" unit.

If they went that route, they should expect to have to prove in court that they operated as two separate families, occupying separate sections of the house (separate kitchens?) which is not plausible if they are a couple. I believe the same tax credits are available for S w/ dependent as HoH, the main difference is a larger standard deduction and an expanded 10% tax bracket--hardly worth a court fight.

I have heard of custodians accepting items into an IRA and then deciding they really don't want to deal with them (i.e. real estate). Maybe something along those lines occurred?

the total for last year is at the top of this year's Billing screen; to see a breakdown of charges, you'll need to go into last year's return if you don't have a copy of the invoice.

Further investigation--you do not have to do a manual over-ride. Open the 1065 and then open tab at bottom "Options" (right after page 6). You can then check a box to "Create statements that entity meets Domestic Filing Exception"

Yes, but currently it is a manual override. I could not find a way around the override, which I do not like to use.

Not unless you're using a bank product. if you were authorized to check the box for Third Party Designee, or have an 8821 or a 2848 on file--and you're comfortable with the idea... use the "Where's Your Refund" function.

I have a colleague who will not file a couple MFJ if the spouse is self-employed and makes estimated payments. IRS invariably credits the primary account with the payments and in the case of divorce, it can get very messy. It's happened to me twice, fortunately both times the primary was cooperative in straightening out the payments.

That recalls one case where the IRS put these guys on notice for running a fraudulent scheme (sending all revenue offshore to a trust, which transferred the money to another trust, which paid all their expenses--no income declared). IRS took their sweet time getting around to the case, thinking they had all the time in the world. Defense was able to argue that they ran the scheme past their CPA, who said it was okay. The court ruled no fraud, and therefore statute had run out. I assume the IRS went after that accountant.

Looks like a Schedule C to me--had a similar situation years ago (before there was a form 1099-NEC). Client was paid in Box 7 of the 1099-MISC. I told him to ask the Board if they could put that in Box 3, otherwise he was subject to S/E tax. They would not, so he had to pay S/E tax. Might ask them about expenses related to the meetings.