Lee B

Yes, filing the 3115 is definitely the right way to handle these issues.

It's probably referring to a newer USB 3.0 port instead of an older USB 2.0 port which your computer probably has.

An excellent detailed analysis in The Tax Advisor: https://www.thetaxadviser.com/issues/2018/aug/c-corp-s-corp-tax-reform.html?utm_source=mnl:cpald&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=14Aug2018

I would send them priority

You can have negative Retained Earning, but not negative Capital Stock.

There is a proposed technical corrections bill floating around, but it isn't expected to be to be passed until December. Supposedly a fix for this problem is not currently included, because the politicians don't want to admit that they made any mistakes ! I am shocked, shocked I tell you

I don't know the answer to this issue, but saying that, "It was just a banking error" seems to me to minimize what could be a problem.

Actually in the TCJA, exemptions still exist. The TCJA has temporarily reduced them to $ 0.

You are overstating the risk with lots of hyperbole. Windows 8.1 is on extended support until January 2023. Windows 7 Pro is receiving extended support from Microsoft until January 15, 2020, which means that Microsoft is still issuing updates and patches for all known security risks until that time. I receive weekly security risk definition updates and large monthly software updates and patches..

Here is a summary from the Journal of Accountancy: The IRS issued proposed regulations on Wednesday regarding the qualified trade or business income deduction under Sec. 199A, which was enacted by P.L. 115-97, the law known as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) (REG-107892-18). At the same time, it issued Notice 2018-64, which provides guidance on how to compute W-2 wages for purposes of the deduction, along with FAQs. The proposed rules include a way that taxpayers can group or aggregate separate trades or businesses and an anti-abuse rule designed to prevent taxpayers from separating out parts of an otherwise disqualified business in an attempt to qualify those separated parts for the Sec. 199A deduction. The deduction, which is in effect for the first time in 2018, allows owners of sole proprietorships, partnerships, trusts, and S corporations to deduct 20% of their qualified business income (QBI). The deduction is generally available to taxpayers whose 2018 taxable incomes fall below $315,000 for joint returns and $157,500 for other taxpayers. The deduction is generally equal to the lesser of 20% of the taxpayer’s QBI plus 20% of the taxpayer’s qualified real estate investment trust (REIT) dividends and qualified publicly traded partnership (PTP) income, or 20% of taxable income minus net capital gains. Deductions for taxpayers above the $157,500/$315,000 thresholds may be limited; the application of those limits is described in the proposed regulations. The IRS is requesting comments on all of the proposed rules, which must be received within 45 days of the date they are published in the Federal Register. The Service noted that, although the rules will not be effective until published as final in the Federal Register, taxpayers may rely on them until then. The regulations address a variety of subjects. Prop. Regs. Sec. 1.199A-1 contains the operational rules, including how to determine the deduction for taxpayers with incomes at or below the threshold amounts and for those with incomes above the thresholds. It also contains definitions of the following terms: aggregated trade or business, applicable percentage, phase-in range, qualified business income, QBI component, qualified PTP income, qualified REIT dividends, reduction amount, relevant passthrough entity (RPE), specified service trade or business (SSTB), threshold amount, total QBI amount, unadjusted basis immediately after acquisition (UBIA) of qualified property, and W-2 wages. The definition of a trade or business is also in this section; the IRS decided to apply the definition of “trade or business” contained in Sec. 162(a) because the definition of trade or business under Sec. 162 is derived from a large amount of case law and administrative guidance interpreting the meaning of trade or business in the context of a broad range of industries. This will provide for administrable rules that are appropriate for the purposes of Sec. 199A and that taxpayers have experience applying, and the IRS believes it will reduce compliance costs, burden, and administrative complexity. Prop. Regs. Sec. 1.199A-2 contains rules for determining W-2 wages and the UBIA of qualified property, both of which are components in calculating limitations on the deduction. The rules for determining W-2 wages are based on the rules under the repealed Sec. 199 deduction for qualified domestic production activities, except, unlike Sec. 199, the Sec. 199A W-2 wages are determined separately for each trade or business. Prop Regs. Sec. 1.199A-3 restates the definitions in Sec. 199A(c) and provides additional guidance on the determination of QBI, qualified REIT dividends, and qualified PTP income. Prop. Regs. Sec. 1.199A-4 contains aggregation rules allowing separate trades or businesses to be grouped when applying the Sec. 199A rules. The IRS rejected comments suggesting the application of the grouping rules under Sec. 469, the passive loss provision, and instead proposed a flexible method that looks into common ownership, shared services, and other commonality, but specifically excludes SSTBs from being aggregated under the rules. The regulations impose a duty of consistency that requires that once multiple trades or businesses are aggregated into a single aggregated trade or business under Sec. 199A, taxpayers must consistently report the aggregated group in subsequent tax years. Aggregation allows for ease of administration and was one of the AICPA’s recommendations in a letter it sent to the IRS in February. Prop. Regs. Sec. 1.199A-5 defines specified service trades or businesses and the trade or business of performing services as an employee. The regulations include an anti-abuse rule designed to prevent taxpayers from separating out parts of what otherwise would be an integrated SSTB, such as the administrative functions, in an attempt to qualify those separated parts for the Sec. 199A deduction. Prop. Regs. Sec. 1.199A-6 contains special rules for RPEs, PTPs, trusts, and estates that these entities may need to follow for purposes of computing the entities’ or their owners’ Sec. 199A deductions. Prop. Regs. Sec. 1.643(f)-1 addresses concerns regarding the abusive use of multiple trusts by confirming the applicability of Sec. 643(f). Sec. 643(f) permits the IRS to issue regulations to prevent taxpayers from establishing multiple nongrantor trusts or contributing additional capital to multiple existing nongrantor trusts in order to avoid federal income tax. Notice 2018-64, issued contemporaneously with the proposed regulations, contains a proposed revenue procedure with three methods for calculating W-2 wages (1) for purposes of the limitation based on W-2 wages to the amount of the deduction for qualified business income under Sec. 199A; and (2) for purposes of the reduction to the Sec. 199A deduction based on W-2 wages for certain specified agricultural and horticultural cooperative patrons. — Sally P. Schreiber ([email protected]) is a JofA senior editor

I especially agree with the comment that the form changes may cause more confusion with the increased possibility of missed deductions.

Part B can only be postponed without penalty as long as you have qualifying employer provided health insurance. Just went thru this with my wife who just retired several months ago at age 69 after being a nurse for 45 years. She had to prove she had qualifying employer provided health insurance so that she could avoid the penalty being added to her Part B premium. My wife signed up for Medicare Part A at age 65, because once you turn age 65, most employer coverage considers Medicare Part A to be primary, which would be a nasty surprise if you turned 65 and hadn't signed up for Medicare Part A expecting your employer health insurance to pick up everything. In which case this TP may be making a serious mistake ! Also Part D ( Prescription Coverage) can not be postponed, because I missed the deadline by 30 days 6 years ago and now I pay a $3.30 monthly penalty which is added to my monthly Part D premium.

1. You can sign up for social security and delay benefits, not aware that you can do that for Medicare. 2. As long as the TP has Employer provided qualifying HDP health insurance then the TP can delay signing up for Medicare without penalty. 3. Once the spouse signed up for Medicare, her allowable HSA contribution drops to zero, so the TP contribution would be based on one person.

Yeah, I switched to Drake for 2017. I needed to do several 2016 tax returns, so I receive the same exact message when I try to open ATX 2016. Since I didn't renew with ATX for 2017, I no longer receive any support. Fortunately I was able to do these returns with Drake 2016.

Back in April, my work around was to use the prior years EIN. It was a very large company which had multiple EINs. If you are dealing with a smaller entity, you will probably have to paper file Note: This topic was discussed about a month ago.

Actually, it was deliberate, remember all the talk about how much bigger everyone's pay check would be . It was an attempt to pump up the enthusiasm for the TCJA and to juice up the economy.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Congressional auditors say about 30 million people — 21 percent of U.S. taxpayers — will have to come up with more money to pay their taxes next year because their employers withheld too little from their paychecks under government tables keyed to the new tax law. New tax withholding tables for employers were put together by the government early this year. About 30 million workers received pay that was “under-withheld” — making their paychecks bigger this year but bringing a larger bill at tax time next spring, according to the Government Accountability Office’s report. About 27 million taxpayers would have been affected even if the new law hadn’t been enacted. The changes, however, added 3 million to that number.

No, Section 199A only applies to Qualified Business Income at the 1040 level from pass thru entities (including Schedule C).

I did an analysis of a conversion from S to C for my largest S Corporation client back in March. My conclusion was that while the gap is definitely narrowed, it was still advantageous for my client to remain an S Corp. If a client wants to load up on fringe benefits, including a customized defined benefit plan, then I think a C Corp would be the way to go.

That's O K, it happens all the time

Yeah, I thought about, but my understanding is that with respect differential wages that the payments and the W-2 comes from the employer while the employee is on active duty.

In my experience, the use of the phrase "failure to deposit correctly" is only used when a deposit which should have been made via EFTPS or other electronic means was made by check or cash. Your letter may actually be due to a IRS computer glitch.

Excellent advice, in a complex situation like this, there so many ways the exchange could be blown.

It's a bit unclear whether you're talking about a 2016 or 2017 efile reject ? I had one of these rejects back in April. In my case a very large employer changed one of their FEINs during 2017, but according to the IRS the new FEIN was not approved until after 12/31/17, so they rejected my client's return. My workaround was to use this employer's previous FEIN and the efile then went through.

It's fillable on my Chrome browser.