jklcpa

It may be a glitch if there was a credit shown on line 12 of the 8812, but if line 12 is -0- then 8867 isn't required. That appears to be a factor in determining the need to include the 8867, so the diagnostics may or may not be correct. In general, reading code that deals with the due diligence of "determining eligibility" of these credits I'd agree with you, however looking at the instructions for 8867 that I've quoted below, it may not be a required form for inclusion with the return you are trying to file. After reading the quote immediately below, if you do remove the 8867, I think you should still keep notes and due diligence Q&A to document your work and determinations anyway to be safe. If you need the actual reference and language in the code, it says this (bold is mine):

This is what I do and have never attached the 1099.

Years ago the firm I worked for had a retailer of fresh fish and seafood. OMG, that smell permeated the papers and the clothes of the poor staff person that worked at their site. I was very thankful that it was not assigned to me! I worked on it in later years back in the office, and the smell would be on my hands from working with their journals. It was just gag-me awful.

Found this ATX KB solution that may help. Step 7 seems to be your answer: https://support.cch.com/kb/solution/000071197/000071197 Please note that I can't confirm this personally as I no longer use ATX but maybe someone else will confirm that this is the correct process.

I think you misunderstood me also. If a student starts with the Fall 2019 semester and completes the degree in 4 consecutive academic years, that student would complete the 4-yr degree in Spring 2023. That would span 5 tax years. What I was answering, and I think what DaveT was asking, is that the Spring 2023 tuition may be prepaid in 2022 and used as part of the AOTC for the 2022 tax year, which would encompass both the 4th academic year AND the 4th and final tax year for the AOTC. In this scenario, there is no 5th tax year involved. I think that is DaveT's latest question. Do you know why that would not work?

Yes, that would work as long as the next year's course that is being prepaid begins within the first 3 months of the year.

I'm sorry, Tom. Don't be too hard on yourself because we all make mistakes from time to time. Like you, mine are usually with the most demanding of clients and are usually not answers to the most complicated of questions they ask.

This is a good point, but also remember that, not only is it available for only 4 tax years, the AOTC is also only available for the first 4 years of postsecondary curriculum, as determined by the educational institution, generally the freshman through senior years.

What Lion said, unless one of the employers withheld too much SS or Tier 1 RRTA, or it is excess Tier 2 RRTA. Even if there are multiple employers, if one withheld too much then the employee must go back to the employer. If there's too much Tier 2 RRTA, then form 843 is required. https://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc608

If you are asking about the statement that must be attached, it was discussed in this topic that also includes links to the instructions and sample attachment:

Was that addressed to me? If so, as I said, "I did my absolute best to ascertain the correct information" and that would have included further discussions with clients as to timing and methods of payment from the Treasury, and instructing them where and how to look in their records or on the IRS website. In the end, once my clients were better informed and looked for the payments, none of my clients had the issue you described, and I believe that the returns were filed accurately. What I read last year from some preparers was they were getting the returns out the door and filed quickly, took whatever the client said as valid information without question, and were going to let the IRS sort it out and correct it later. That "get 'em out the door" mentality included the unemployment issue too instead of waiting for the programming update. I gave my clients the choice and again, I explained that this could cause delays in processing if they had to wait for IRS corrections. All of affected my clients wanted to wait for the programming to be updated, and none had difficulties with refunds being delays or returns being held in limbo.

Yes, clients have to be trained. Mine are either supplying the letters or telling me what they received. I also had the first one come in with both spouse's letters for the ACTC. I will say that last year, and will be the same this year too, that I did my absolute best to ascertain the correct information for inclusion on the returns for the EIPs and for the correct taxation of the unemployment. All of my clients opted to wait and to file correct returns for the unemployment after the law change AND programs were updated. I don't want my clients' returns ending up in limbo needing correction, IRS human intervention, or for my clients to receive notices. My clients hire me me for the best job and advice I can give them, and that will never include "file it and let the IRS sort it out" way of dealing with these issues. This is especially true now more than ever with the IRS backlog, lack of staff, and difficulty of contact.

This was according to Merry over on the Drake forum saying that the patch for all these forms should be available today:

Agree with Abby and tell them why.

Yes, do that then if expenses are included in col a, lines 2 or 4 of the M-2. That is what the instructions say to do.

The PPP tax-exempt income increases stockholder's basis. It should be shown as an increase to Other Adjustments Account and doesn't add to AAA. Ordinarily the distribution would reduce AAA but not below -0- (losses can), and then any distribution not offsetting AAA would then reduce OAA. Did the distribution exceed basis?

I saw a TV commercial for this. How many clients will get these and not tell us?! This seems like nightmare tracking unless the credit card issuer will be providing the detailed reporting for the tax returns.

Wait, that's my job!

This year it's also Autism Awareness Day, Easter Monday, National Animal Crackers Day, National Linemen Appreciation Day (wires, not sports), and National Velociraptor Awareness Day. The way things are going, I'll be Animal Crackers cuckoo for Cocopuffs after this season is over.

IRS Notice 2014-7, Q&A number 9 says this: (Question 10 from that notice deals with amended returns for this issue.)

Tom, those same instructions that I quoted in my post above were in the 1040 last year too. Doesn't ATX have an input for income to flow to line 1 without entering in the W2 area? I searched this site for "IHSS" and found that you asked virtually the same question in 2021, and one of your own replies in that topic was that ATX was aware of its errors in handling and was going to fix it. Was that ever resolved? Have you gone into the 2020 software to see your input? Not being wise, trying to help you. Here's the topic from last year - see the 4th post down, made by you.

Tom, 1040 instructions say to report this on 1040, line 1 and back it out on Sch 1, line 8z. That way the income allows the EIC but isn't taxed. Part of line 1 instructions: Sch 1, line 8z:

Answered here:

This would be a nonaccountable plan for reimbursing expenses, and those reimbursements would be included in compensation.

Check out 2nd entry of this very old topic. https://www.atxcommunity.com/topic/1289-canada-income/#comment-8689