TexTaxToo

Of course, those really, really special people who turn 65 on January 1, start getting the over 65 standard deduction the previous year, when they are 64 the entire year. Unless they died during the year, then they don't get the extra standard deduction. Unless they died on 12/31, in which case they do get the extra.

Pub 550

Have you reviewed the Proxy statement regarding tax matters for the merger: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1732845/000110465924053001/tm243828-20_defm14a.htm#tMUFI

You must make taxable a part of the scholarship that was or could be used for tuition, in addition to the amount in excess of tuition. For example, if tuition was $24,000 and unrestricted scholarships were $40,000 ($16k in excess of tuition which was used for room and board). If you make $20,000 of the scholarship taxable to pay nonqualified expenses, that leaves $20,000 to apply to the tuition, and that leaves $4,000 of tuition available for the credit. The scholarship terms must allow that $20,000 to be used for nonqualified expenses and it would be taxable to the student. And pay attention to Slippery Pencil re. kiddie tax and getting an accurate statement of account - was the scholarship actually used for qualified expenses in another year, or was it for room and board in the current year.

Hmm. Pub 4012 is the guide for VITA/TCE. It says:

Note that this type of "theft" is not subject to the 10% of AGI+$100 reduction for casualty losses and should flow to line 16 of Schedule A (not line 15).

Rev. Proc. 2024-31 explains the QM PIN requirements. Manufacturers must label units with the QM PIN, or otherwise provide it to purchasers. They must at least quarterly provide the IRS with lists of the QM PINs they have issued which qualify. So the IRS will know which are legitimate. I think it is unlikely that there will be a generally available lookup tool, as there would be too much opportunity for fraud (someone could look up numbers until they got a match and use it on a return). "The IRS urges QMs not to place a product’s PIN on the exterior packaging of the product," presumably for the same reason. I wonder if there will be a new reject code "The QM PIN entered on the return has previously been entered on another return".

Judy, I disagree. Worksheets I and III should have 1 for the alternative family size (and that may be his problem), but Form 8962 should have 2. The example on page 44 of Pub 974 makes this clear. The example has one spouse with no dependents and one spouse with two dependents: Then on the worksheets:

Here's what I would get for Worksheet III manually: 1. 1 2. 41068 3. 14580 4. 281 5. 0.0524 6. 2152 7. 179 So my 36b would be 179. What did you do differently?

I'm not sure this is your problem, but a few more things to check: Line 10 should be checked 'No', and you must enter the monthly amounts on lines 12-23, not the annual amounts on line 11, even though all monthly amounts are the same. Columns a, b, f must be the amounts from the Form 1095-A line 35 is blank, line 36a=1, 36c=1, 36d=12, and 36b is your calculated amount The values entered on lines 12-23, column c, are all equal to your 36b calculated amount (the software may do this automatically)

According to the instructions for Form 8962, Line 28 (the cap on repayment): So it would seem the cap is available if income reported is less than 400% of FPL.

In the future the installer will have to provide a 17-char QM PIN (Qualified Manufacturer Product Identification Number) which is a unique number like a serial number that will be required on the tax return - eliminates any need to verify if it qualifies. For 2025, only the QM part of the number will be required. For 2024, there are a couple sites where you can look up model numbers to see if they qualify: https://www.regulations.doe.gov/product-lookup https://ahridirectory.org/ The first one is more official, but I have found it more difficult to find matches unless you have the AHRI reference number already.

I suppose it depends on what you mean by phaseouts - the starting point or the range - and do you mean this year or ever? The range doesn't usually increase, but the starting and ending points do. EIC phases in and out by income which is adjusted for inflation Income limit for IRA deduction phases out and is adjusted for inflation Income limit for contributing to Roth IRA phases out and is adjusted for inflation Income limit for taking student loan interest adjustment phases out and is adjusted Income limits for retirement savings credit phase down by percents and are adjusted Deductibility of long term care premiums phase down by age AMT exemption phases out by income which is adjusted The common phaseouts which are not adjusted are for CTC, ODC, CDCC, AOC, LLC, and tax-free SS.

To answer your first question, if one spouse had a family plan and the other spouse had a self-only plan all year, they are both treated as having had a family plan, and (assuming they are both below age 55) they can contribute a maximum of $8300 combined, but can allocate it any way they want between the two HSAs. In your case, assuming that the wife's excess contribution was subtracted from box 1 on her W-2, you will have to include it (and any earnings) as other income. It appears that she withdrew a bit less than the excess contribution. Why was that?

I agree with Kathy that it would have been better for the father to claim the child and get EITC for her. It doesn't matter that the grandparents provided most of her support. EITC+ACTC more than $4k. If the GP claim the child, you have a shared policy situtation and the 1095-A is reported on both returns - see the instructions for Part IV of Form 8962 - they can allocate the premiums any way they want. Was there APTC? If there was I am surprised that the GP return was accepted without reconciling the 1095-A.