BrewOne

Any reason not to treat it as a hobby? Enter the 1099-K amount and then enter a negative amount for cost of goods sold.

I was looking at the taxability of the income, not the credits. How many students actually get their degree? I don't see how a full-time student couldn't claim they were seeking a degree if they're at an eligible institution taking regular courses. And if there is income over the standard deduction...for the lifetime learning credit, I don't see anything about degree-seeking.

I'd really try to find out if there are any rulings on whether a certificate counts. Or if it is valid to say she is working towards another Bachelor's or Master's

in ATX, you have the opportunity to select the State and not have it default to the trustee's address.

yes, just had a client with modest income who took $15k out of her IRA with 20% withholding--she still owed because of the additional Social Security income being taxed. It's been $25,000 and $32,000 since...the 90's?

good point, although in this case it wasn't Marie's decision. I cancelled my policy and knew that any discoveries for past events would no longer be covered, so I paid for two years of "ERP" coverage. We know how long the IRS can take to get around to sending out notices

click "Support" and "About" mine says Version 23.1.8752.41567 I used the recommended resolution for EFC Reject 38: close return, click Support, then Customer Service Utilities, select Refresh App Configurations this has apparently not fixed it for everyone, according to what I'm seeing on Facebook

thanks, I believe you're right, just had to wait it out. I didn't notice any update going through, but things are processing again.

anyone able to efile (successfully) recently? Getting EFC Reject 38--"This efile was created before downloading the latest program or form update in ATX." As suggested, went through Support: Customer Service Utilities: Refresh App Configurations...but no luck. I might add I have green on Program and Forms. Someone on ATX Facebook page says they are on the phone with ATX and was given an explanation: there is an update out that is not yet available.

There are some pre-MACRS court cases that seem to me to be of limited application. For those who want to take a deep dive into the cesspool (sorry, couldn't resist) Publication 5712 is an IRS audit guide to capitalization. page 27-28, looking at structural components under Building Systems are Plumbing Systems which include "Water and sanitary sewer collection equipment" Audit guides are not authority, but looks like the IRS position would be for 27.5/39

update: looks like an accurate estimate; it took two weeks before it was accepted for e-filing.

update: This is the first year they will be e-filing--not sure how their previous preparer avoided it. Anyway, she was still getting the 1040-ES packet in the mail but that will now stop. It doesn't look to me there's any avoiding the problem of attribution unless you file separately.

was the money from an IRA? if so, then indicate on the 1099-R worksheet how much was QCD

that's very strange. I thought it was carryover that was causing the error--deleting the 1116 and reinstalling should have dealt with the error, although the client would lose the carryover credit.

I believe a high deductible does not automatically mean it is a qualified HDHP, so I would want to make sure before I gave them a green light. Sorry I can't find a good reference at the moment. Single coverage is certainly possible for the spouse.

Thanks. I might just create some for her at irs.gov I may have been thinking about when you enter the 1040-ES payments, you have the opportunity to enter them under the primary or the spouse. This is a new client and she (the spouse) had vouchers with just her name and social on them, even though they filed jointly in 2022. Maybe the IRS was still sending her the estimated payment packet (I haven't seen one of those in years but maybe they've never filed electronically before?) I've twice run into situations where marriages dissolved (out of the blue as far as I was concerned) after filing and the spouse was making large estimated payments under their husband's social. Both times I felt like I could have avoided a stressful situation if the vouchers had been under the Social of the one making the payments, not that they can't get screwed up anyway.

I'm hitting a dead end in ATX, searching for a way to print 1040-ES vouchers for the spouse (with their SSN printed out). Seems like that option was there, should be there, but I'm just not seeing how to pull it up. Thanks

much better this year--just done one for a water heater and another for a front door

and I could see this type of client paying cash to "independent contractors"

I don't want to be the messenger if the new exemption amounts expire (in north Florida, not a lot of Schedule A's).

Taxation of the social security with MFS depends on whether or not they lived together. If they lived apart for all of 2023, they would get the same "base amount" of $25,000 that a Single filer would get. If they lived together at any time during 2023, the base amount is zero--in this scenario she would probably have a filing requirement. Ideally, you could plug in all of their income into the software and show them the total tax liability MFJ vs MFS. But it is their decision and it is not always about what would be saved that year--new couples sometimes find out about their spouse's unpaid liabilities when they file jointly.

Is it subject to the Section 179 limit? There is a $28,900 limit unless the vehicle meets other criteria (three possibilities). for 2023, it could work out to 80% (bonus/special depreciation) The Taxbook has a nice section with a worksheet on maximizing 179.

Very specific conditions must be met to claim a like-kind exchange. Bear in mind, you have to deal with the IRS definition of "like-kind exchange" For starters, personal use property is excluded.

the gain, if any, would only be deferred in a like-kind exchange. Otherwise, as personal use property--a gain would be reported on Schedule D ($35,174 minus cost), a loss would be a wash (but should be reported because of the 1099-S).

ATX posted that they were aware of the error message but have not followed up (yet).