Linda Mathey Posted February 14, 2008 Report Share Posted February 14, 2008 I cannot find anyplace within ATX where I can indicate that the taxpayer was in AMT in 2006 and got no benefit from the state tax deduction. Therefore, the refund received should not be taxable but ATX is taxing it. I know I can just remove the amount but shouldn't the program be able to detect this and not tax it. Has anyone else encountered this issue? If yes how did you handle or did you just override it? Thanks for any assistance. Linda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booger Posted February 14, 2008 Report Share Posted February 14, 2008 Linda, where is Magnolia, Ohio? I know where Engagement, Ohio is. It's halfway between Dayton and Marion. Booger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jainen Posted February 14, 2008 Report Share Posted February 14, 2008 >>shouldn't the program be able to detect this and not tax it<< No, I don't even see how it could. You must go back to the 2006 program and recalculate both the regular tax and AMT with the recovery amount added back in. Maybe in this case it's simple enough to do in your head, but you don't want the computer to assume there was no tax benefit for the entire refund without actually running the 2006 numbers again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linda Mathey Posted February 14, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 14, 2008 Linda, where is Magnolia, Ohio? I know where Engagement, Ohio is. It's halfway between Dayton and Marion. Booger Magnolia is about 10 miles NE of Atwood Lake, about 30 min South of Canton and about 10 min off RT 77 directly east of the Bolivar-Zoar exit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linda Mathey Posted February 15, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 15, 2008 >>shouldn't the program be able to detect this and not tax it<< No, I don't even see how it could. You must go back to the 2006 program and recalculate both the regular tax and AMT with the recovery amount added back in. Maybe in this case it's simple enough to do in your head, but you don't want the computer to assume there was no tax benefit for the entire refund without actually running the 2006 numbers again. I guess I am giving too much credit to the program. I did re-run the calculation with and without the refund and the tax is the same because of the large AMT. Therefore I guess I will just leave it off the form and hope it does not create a matching problem for the IRS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maslarcpa Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 I think that is one the line 10 worksheet - line 8 - "if tax benefit is limited by AMT...." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.