|
I know, I think my accountant is going to kill me. I thought I had my W-2 to send him, like I told him that I would days ago, but I can't find the damned thing. Not sure what to do now. I guess request a replacement from the accounting department at my job...
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2012 03:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 22:20 |
|
|
My company's payroll department is printing me a new W-2 right now, which I will scan and email to my accoutant, and then I will attach the hardcopy to my return on Monday I guess. Thank god oh lord.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2012 16:17
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:I doubt anyone here knows estate law but if an estate is the beneficiary of an IRA and it is liquidated, can the estate distribute the income to the heirs to offset the tax liability? I'm not disagreeing with the CPAs in here but you may also want to look into rollovers for the IRA account, unless the heirs of the estate need the money now. You can rollover the IRA into inherited IRA accounts for each beneficiary, which will means they get to defer some of the income tax on the IRA distributions. There are lots of little details and nuances but it's worth bringing up with the professionals helping the estate. If they've never heard of this then they are dumb and you should get new help.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2012 15:13
|
|
|
I know this was earlier in the IRA conversation but I think thisArdennes posted:Well the issue is that the IRAs themselves had no beneficiaries and there wasn't trust so they had to be liquidated wholesale back in 2011. The estate had to gobble everything up because there was no mechanism to get the IRAs to the beneficiaries. is not correct. I'm not dogging on you Ardennes, but the IRAs could have been rolled over to inherited IRA accounts for each heir of the estate. The estate did not have to take a lump-sum distribution from the IRA account and distribute out that distribution. If it is possible to unwind that lump-sum distribution, the executor should probably try to do that. It is probably too late, though - unless I misread your post, and the lump-sum distribution hasn't happened yet. If it hasn't happened yet, don't let it. Also, I think the easiest way to think about income taxation of estates is to remember that the estate is a pass-through taxpayer. Any income that the estate holds onto for the year will be taxed to the estate. Income that the estate receives, but passes on to the heirs, will be taxed to the heirs and not to the estate. Not everything the estate receives is income - but a lump-sum distribution from the decedent's IRA is income. Ardennes I think that you may be worrying a little too much. Whether the estate pays the tax on the income or passes the income out to the heirs to be taxed at their level, the income tax is only going to be paid once. Abbi's point about the basis is important, though, because it sounds like the decedent's basis in the IRA should be higher than a typical basis, so the amount of income tax should be lower on the lump-sum distribution to the estate. Ardennes posted:Basically, can I make an strong enough argument to my relative to hold off on having estate accountant turning in the estate's 1041 2011 return because I think there are just major problems with how he is doing it? You can probably make a good argument for not rushing the filing. As Abbi mentioned earlier, the estate can elect a fiscal year that runs from the day after the decedent's death. The fiscal year can run until the end of the calendar year or can run the full twelve months. If the executor elects a fiscal year running into the next calendar year, the beneficiary gets to count any distributions of income as occuring in that next calendar year. So if your decedent died this year on March 30, 2012, the executor picks a fiscal year that runs April 1, 2012 through March 30, 2013. The executor makes the distribution during this fiscal year, but it won't get picked up on the beneficiary's return until 2013, which means the beneficiary pays tax in 2014 when filing her 2013 tax return. NOTE: the selection of a fiscal year is made on the estate's income tax return, so make sure the executor has made a conscious decision about whether to elect a fiscal year or not, before filing the return.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2012 14:57
|
|
|
Not to whiteknight the IRS, but it's actually one of the best government agencies in terms of its service, transparency, and efficiency. You need to get an accountant who has experience handling cross-border tax issues. Renouncing your citizenship to escape US taxation is not easy and has all sorts of rules and conditions.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2012 15:07
|
|
|
Orgophlax posted:I guess I'll ask here first before making my own thread. Assuming your grandmother was a nonresident of Pennsylvania when she died, the Pennsylvania inheritance tax is only going to apply to any of her real estate or personal property that was located in Pennsylvania. Here's the relevant statute: 72 P.S. § 9106 quote:An inheritance tax for the use of the Commonwealth is imposed upon every transfer subject to tax under this article at the rates specified in section 2116. "Transfer" is the relevant term in that statute. A "transfer" is defined as: 72 P.S. § 9102 quote:"TRANSFER." Includes the passage of ownership of property, or interest in property or income from property, in possession or enjoyment, present or future, in trust or otherwise. "Property is the relevant term in the definition of "transfer." In that same statute, "property" is defined as: quote:"PROPERTY" or "ESTATE." Includes the following: As you can see from #4, for nonresidents the PA inheritance tax is only going to apply to transfers of real and tangible personal property located in Pennsylvania. Unless your grandmother owned either real estate or tangible personal property in Pennsylvania, you are probably in the clear. I.E., if you are getting a check for cash, that won't trigger the inheritance tax. As others mentioned, you will get a K-1 from the estate which will tell you whether you have any income tax issues.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2012 17:26
|
|
|
Mandalay posted:I noticed that there are vast swaths of Enterprise Zones in Los Angeles that provide for, among other things, "Up to $37,440 over a 5-year period per each qualified employee can be claimed by an Enterprise Zone business as a tax credit. An employee can qualify under any one of 13 different categories." http://cdd.lacity.org/bus_statecred.html The EZ hiring tax credit can be claimed by "individuals, sole proprietors, corporations, estates, trusts, and partnerships operating or investing in a trade or business located within a designated EZ." So a two-person LLC could claim it. However, you only get the hiring credit for hiring a "qualified employee" - which has to be someone who is basically poor, receiving government benefits, disabled, a Native American, an ex-con, or a veteran. Additionally, the employee also has to spend 90% of work time on activities for the business, and 50% of the work has to be performed in the EZ. So while your GF could create an LLC and do architectural consulting work, she would only get the tax credit for hiring someone that fits the "qualified employee" category. Also, this a tax credit against the business's income - it's not a "refundable" tax credit, if you know what that means. Your gf wouldn't get any actual money from the state government, but she would conceivably lower her business's tax bill. If your gf made no money with her business, she'd be unable to use the credit (although she can carry it forward to the next year). So there is no point in "claiming some tax credits" unless she has taxable income from the business. The amount of the credit is tied to the amount of wages paid to the qualified employee - so she can't just hire someone who is a "qualified employee" and then take the credit without paying them. If she takes the credit, she can't take a business deduction for those same wages. I didn't see anything excluding relatives of the owner but I'm sure that restriction exists somewhere. Besides, even if it didn't, your gf would have to form the LLC, hire a relative/friend who is a "qualified employee", and pay that person actual wages. The relative/friend would thus have taxable income coming in - and if s/he is a "qualified employee" who is qualified because s/he is receiving income-dependent government benefits, that extra taxable income from your gf could screw up their benefits eligibility. All in all, forget about these credits unless she is legitimately starting up a new business and she expects to make money doing it. It makes no sense to form a new business just for the credits. Source: https://www.ftb.ca.gov/forms/2011/11_3805zbk.pdf
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2012 20:07
|
|
|
I think the main problem with these sort of "hiring" credits is that they are really only useful for established businesses. Most new businesses fail in the first year or two, and many businesses take a few years to really get out of the red - so a tax credit, while useful, isn't that valuable because such businesses usually don't have much taxable income to offset.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2012 21:44
|
|
|
Also the formatting of the OP should be corrected - that much bold text is difficult to read.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2012 14:23
|
|
|
I wasn't trying to be snarky, my guess is that the OP is missing a [/b] somewhere. I figured it was an easy thing to fix.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2012 18:48
|
|
|
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/3057/can-i-avoid-paying-a-tax-bill-by-writing-accepted-for-value-on-itquote:Dear Cecil: Heh.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2012 16:41
|
|
|
Evil Vin posted:I recently won a lawsuit and I am supposedly getting around $15,000, the money was originally supposed to be an inheritance (and triple that It is probably inheritance, which won't be taxable. But I suppose there are a few ways that it could be damages instead. Was the lawsuit about who should take the inheritance? Or was it about a claim for damages of some sort - breach of fiduciary duty, for example. Did the court make a determination as to who would receive the inheritance, or did you and the other parties reach a settlement agreement which provides that you will receive $15,000?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2012 18:04
|
|
). My mother claims I don't have to pay tax on it since it's an inheritance, while I'm pretty sure technically it's something different because it's been through a lawsuit (damages?). So who is right here?
|
idontcare posted:I posted this in the legal advice thread and afterward thought that was dumb and it should actually go here. So, here goes: Since this is a question about taxes and Form W-9, I'll answer here rather than the legal questions thread. What does "started up a side business" mean? Did you incorporate a corporation, or organize an LLC? (IE, did you file paperwork with your state's Corporation Commission or similar) Do you have a "doing business as" name (a DBA name)?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2012 19:25
|
|
|
GuyWithCigar posted:I couldn't find a thread for international tax questions, but really my question also relates to US Income Tax. I am moving to Australia and looking for advice on how to minimize my tax burden abroad, as well as on the US Income Taxes I will still have to file. Can anyone point me to a good resource (or give some good advice) to learn more about common pitfalls and hidden expenses when earning income abroad, especially in Australia? What you want is to start with IRS Publication 54: Tax Guide for U.S. Citizens and Resident Aliens Abroad." Also, you mention the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion, which permits you to ignore up to ~$92k of foreign earned income for purposes of calculating your taxable income under the U.S. tax rules. Note that this exclusion only prevents the U.S. from taxing this income - Australian taxes will still apply. And for income above the 92k limit, you can always pay Australian tax on it and then claim a credit against your US taxes on the same income, so you will still be protected against double taxation on the same income. If you are going to stay in Australia for a while, I recommend finding an Australian tax accountant who regularly works with Americans. You don't want to miss out on things like Form 8939, the FBAR, and also whether you need to pay Social Security and other payroll taxes while you are over there.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2012 19:48
|
|
|
idontcare posted:We didn't incorporate, but do have a DBA name. We went down to city hall and registered and got a certificate to do business in the city of Boston. Then, we went to the bank and opened up a business account and got a tax id#. PM me your DBA name, let me see if I can dig around the Massachusetts corporations database to see what kind of entity they are treating you as. The question, for federal tax purposes (and thus for the W-9), is whether you are a sole properietorship or disregarded entity, or a partnership. The simplest way to handle this is to say you are a sole proprietorship/disregarded entity, and just put your personal info and SSN on there. But because you agreed to 50/50 with your prior friend, and now you are 50/50 with the new guy, there is a possibility that under Mass law that you are a general partnership, and therefore should complete the W-9 in the partnership's name, which would be the DBA name using the TIN you opened the accout with. I assume you have no written agreement with either your prior friend or the new guy? edit: if you don't want to PM me any info, go here and put in the relevant info, and pull up your business if possible. (It may not come up, since it's a DBA registration only.)
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2012 20:03
|
|
|
idontcare posted:I searched through that link and my DBA name didn't show. I think you should fill out the form as a sole proprietorship, and just use your name and SSN. Ignore your business's tax id. Then when you pay this dude, you pay him 50% of the contract price as though he were an independent contractor, which it sounds like he basically is. I also think you should just form a single-member LLC, which is pretty simple and makes life easier.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2012 20:28
|
|
|
I respectfully disagree - applying for an EIN does not affect the tax classification of an entity. idontcare may have applied for the EIN as a partnership, but that doesn't make his business a partnership. The IRS will look at state law to see what the underlying business entity is, and of course the entity will use its first tax return to formally signal its intention to be treated as a corp, s corp, partnership, or sole proprietorship. If we want to be particularly technical, idontcare may have created a partnership when he and his friend agreed to perform joint work on a project in exchange for a split in the profits. That's (theoretically) a general partnership - which was then dissolved when his friend split (ie, left the partnership). I say that this partnership was dissolved because it sounds like idontcare's friend isn't going to get any of the proceeds of the contract - if he were a partner, he'd be entitled to 50% of the partnership's income, which would be half of the contract since idontcare has apparently hired a new guy to help with the project. So maybe idontcare has created a new partnership with his new buddy, but in my mind, the principal person in these transaction is idontcare, and he's just bringing this new guy on for one particular project. This doesn't sound like a general partnership to me, this sounds like idontcare has hired this new guy for a specific project, exactly like an independent contractor.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2012 22:24
|
|
|
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2012/07/hr-block-.html H&R Block did a cute infographic where they did the taxes for Batman and Spider-man... and got Batman's wrong. They said that Batman had $102,000,000 in annual income, plus $43,000,000 in capital gains, but they said he would have zero income tax because he made charitable gifts totalling $279,000,000. Wow. That tax position would have Batman failing to pay a substantial amount of tax on approx. $72 million - whoops.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2012 20:46
|
|
|
Tyro posted:I withdrew some funds from a retirement account - in order to roll the money over and avoid paying the income tax, do I just have to invest the same amount into an IRA? It seems too simple - no goofy forms to fill out or anything, I just reconcile it when I file my taxes? I hope the CPAs will correct me if I'm wrong, but a roll-over is done when the custodian of your current account transfers the funds to the custodian of the new account. If you withdraw the funds to yourself, and then try to put them into a new account, you don't get the tax benefits of a roll-over. In other words, can you undo the withdrawal? Did someone advise you to withdraw those funds in order to make a roll-over?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2012 15:20
|
|
|
Speaking of CP2000 notices, I have a client who just got one with a proposed balance due of $1.5 million.  Obviously this is because the IRS doesn't have the basis information, but even with the correct basis information, it appears that his tax preparer failed to report approximately $450k in long-term gain. Whoops.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2012 21:20
|
|
|
AbbiTheDog posted:Speaking as a tax preparer, 95% of the time when the client gets one of these notices it's because they neglected to get info to me. Yeah, that wasn't the issue here - the tax preparer in question is a large multi-national organization, and it looks like one of its overseas subsidiaries did a bunch of sales which the home office failed to include on the return. We had just become aware of this omission a few weeks ago, and were already trying to locate all the basis information for the sale, when the CP2000 came in the mail. Hahaha good thing we were already on top of the issue, or we would have been screwed trying to find all of the information in time.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2012 17:56
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 22:20 |
|
|
I think you guys are looking at this all wrong. Bojanglesworth is clearly owed the difference between $30,000 and what he was actually paid. I think he should confront his friend and demand for the rest of the money.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2012 21:07
|
|