


Ask the community...
You're absolutely right to be frustrated about this! What makes it even more maddening is that the IRS has the authority to waive interest and penalties in cases of "reasonable cause," but they almost never extend that same flexibility to taxpayers who've been essentially forced to give them interest-free loans through overwithholding. I've been tracking this issue for years, and the numbers are staggering. The average tax refund is around $3,000, which means millions of Americans are collectively giving the government billions in interest-free loans annually. If you calculate what that money could earn in even a basic high-yield savings account (currently around 4-5%), we're talking about serious money that taxpayers are losing out on. The irony is that the IRS actively encourages people to overwithhold through their messaging around "getting a refund" rather than educating taxpayers about optimizing their withholding to break even. It's in their financial interest to keep this system exactly as it is.
This is exactly what I needed to hear! I've been feeling like I was crazy for being frustrated about this, but you've really laid out the numbers in a way that shows how significant this issue actually is. The fact that the IRS actively encourages overwithholding while charging us penalties for underpayment really does feel like a rigged system. I'm definitely going to look into some of the tools mentioned in this thread to optimize my withholding for next year. Even if I can just get back half of that $3,400 I overwitheld this year and put it into a high-yield savings account, that's still money working for me instead of the government. Thanks for putting this in perspective - it's motivating me to actually do something about it instead of just complaining!
The frustration is totally justified! What's particularly galling is that this asymmetric interest policy isn't just unfair - it's actually quite profitable for the government. The Treasury Department essentially gets to use taxpayer overwithholding as a massive, interest-free financing mechanism for government operations throughout the year. I did some quick math on your $3,400 excess withholding: if that money was spread evenly throughout the year (about $283/month), and you had put it in a basic 4.5% high-yield savings account instead, you'd have earned roughly $77 in interest by tax time. Multiply that across millions of taxpayers, and we're talking about billions in lost opportunity cost. The real kicker? When the government borrows money through Treasury bonds, they pay interest rates that are often higher than what most savings accounts offer. So they're essentially getting a better deal from us (0% interest) than they give to actual investors who lend them money voluntarily. Your best move is definitely to adjust that W-4 and put those extra dollars to work for YOU instead of Uncle Sam. The peace of mind from a smaller refund is worth way less than having access to your own money throughout the year.
I work as a tax preparer and see this confusion about Roth IRA dividends constantly during tax season. The bottom line is that dividends earned within a Roth IRA cannot be separated from other earnings for withdrawal purposes - they all get lumped together as "earnings" by the IRS. Here's what happens: When dividends are paid inside your Roth IRA, they increase your total earnings balance. If you withdraw ANY amount beyond your contributions, the IRS treats it as coming from earnings first (after contributions are exhausted), regardless of whether you think you're "just taking the dividends." The 5-year rule clock starts January 1st of the tax year for your first contribution. So if you first contributed in 2020, your 5-year period ends January 1, 2025. You need both the 5-year rule AND to be 59½ to take earnings (including dividends) tax and penalty-free. One thing I tell clients: if you need current income from investments, consider keeping dividend-paying stocks in a taxable account instead, where you can access the dividends immediately and only pay the qualified dividend tax rate (usually 0-20% depending on your income).
This is exactly the kind of clear, professional explanation I was hoping to find! As someone new to Roth IRAs, I really appreciate you breaking down how the IRS actually treats dividends versus how we might intuitively think about them. Your point about keeping dividend stocks in taxable accounts for current income needs makes a lot of sense, especially for someone like me who might need some cash flow before hitting 59½. I hadn't considered that strategy before - I was just thinking about maximizing tax-free growth in the Roth without considering the flexibility trade-offs. Quick follow-up question: when you say "qualified dividend tax rate," does that apply to all dividends from major stock investments, or are there specific requirements the stocks need to meet? I want to make sure I understand this correctly before restructuring how I invest. Thanks for sharing your professional expertise - it's really helpful to get perspective from someone who deals with these scenarios regularly!
Just want to echo what Paolo said about keeping dividend stocks in taxable accounts if you need current income. I made this switch last year after getting burned by early withdrawal penalties, and it's been much better for my cash flow situation. One thing that really helped me understand the Roth IRA ordering rules was looking at Form 8606 instructions on the IRS website. It clearly shows how withdrawals are treated: contributions first, then conversions, then earnings (which include all dividends, capital gains, and other growth). There's no way to cherry-pick just the dividends. For anyone still confused about this, I'd recommend reviewing your annual Roth IRA statements to see the breakdown between contributions and earnings. Most brokerages show this clearly, and it helps you understand exactly how much you could withdraw penalty-free if needed (just the contribution portion). The tax code isn't intuitive here, but once you understand that ALL growth inside a Roth IRA gets treated the same way regardless of its source, the rules make more sense.
I'm surprised nobody mentioned quarterly estimated taxes yet! If you're making money from self-employment, you might need to make quarterly tax payments to avoid penalties. The IRS expects you to pay taxes throughout the year, not just at filing time.
Quarterly taxes for a 16yo mowing lawns seems excessive. IRS isn't going after kids for missing quarterly payments on small amounts. In my experience, filing annually is fine for teen side jobs unless they're making serious money (like $10k+).
As someone who went through this exact situation a few years ago, I can share what worked for me. First, yes you do need to report this income since you're over the $400 threshold for self-employment. But don't stress too much about the bank deposits - for amounts under $10k, they typically won't question where the cash came from. Here's what I wish someone had told me: start keeping better records NOW. Create a simple spreadsheet with dates, jobs, and payments. Also track your expenses like gas, equipment, supplies - these deductions can significantly reduce what you owe. I ended up saving about $400 in taxes just by deducting my lawn mower, gas, and maintenance costs. For filing, you'll use Schedule C and Schedule SE along with Form 1040. The self-employment tax is about 15.3%, but you might not owe income tax depending on your total income. Since your parents claim you as a dependent, you still need to file your own return. Consider it good practice for adult life! Most tax software can handle this situation, or you might want to have your parents help you through it the first time.
This is really helpful advice! I'm in a similar situation but only made about $2,800 doing dog walking and pet sitting. Do the same rules apply even if I'm under the $5,200 amount mentioned in the original post? And how detailed do my records need to be - like do I need to write down every single walk or can I just track weekly totals?
This has been such an eye-opening discussion! I'm in a very similar boat - making about $85k and consistently getting $2,800-3,200 refunds each year. I never really thought about it as giving the government an interest-free loan until reading through these comments. I'm definitely going to try the approach of putting the standard deduction amount ($14,600 for 2024) in Step 4(b) of my W-4. That seems like the most straightforward solution for someone like me with a single job and no itemized deductions. Quick question for the group - if I make this change now in late 2024, will it cause any issues with my withholding being too low for the remainder of the year? Should I calculate a prorated amount based on remaining pay periods, or is it safe to use the full annual standard deduction amount even if I'm making the change partway through the year? Thanks to everyone for sharing their experiences - this community is incredibly helpful for navigating these tax complexities!
Great question about making the change mid-year! You're right to think about the timing. Since we're in late 2024, you'll want to be a bit careful about putting the full $14,600 standard deduction amount on your W-4 right now. The withholding system will spread that deduction reduction across your remaining pay periods, which could result in too little being withheld for the short time left in the year. Instead, you might want to calculate a smaller amount for the rest of 2024, then update your W-4 again in January 2025 with the full standard deduction amount. For example, if you have 4 pay periods left in 2024, you might only put about $2,400-3,000 in Step 4(b) to avoid underwithholding. Then in January, submit a fresh W-4 with the full $15,000 standard deduction for 2025 (the amount typically increases each year). Alternatively, you could just wait until January to make the change and get the full benefit for all of 2025. That might be the safest approach to avoid any surprises when you file your 2024 return!
This thread has been incredibly helpful! I'm dealing with a similar overwithholding situation - making about $102k and getting back around $4,200 each year. One thing I wanted to add for anyone considering these adjustments: make sure to factor in any life changes that might happen during the year. I made the mistake last year of adjusting my withholding in March, then got married in September and completely forgot to update my W-4 again. Even though my spouse and I file separately, the change in filing status affected my tax situation. Also, for those mentioning the IRS Withholding Estimator - I found it works much better if you have your most recent pay stub and last year's tax return handy when you use it. The tool asks for pretty specific information about year-to-date earnings and withholdings. One last tip: if your employer uses a payroll service like ADP or Paychex, you can often submit W-4 changes online through their employee portal, which tends to process faster than paper forms through HR.
Thanks for mentioning the life changes factor! That's something I hadn't considered. I'm actually planning to get married next year, so I'll need to remember to revisit my W-4 when that happens. Quick question about the online payroll portals - do you know if changes submitted through those systems still follow the same 30-day processing rule that @Mateusius Townsend mentioned earlier? Or do they typically get implemented faster since they re'electronic? Also, for anyone else following this thread, I just wanted to mention that I finally bit the bullet and used the IRS Withholding Estimator today. It recommended putting $12,800 in Step 4 b(for) my situation which (is less than the full standard deduction amount, probably because of my income level and tax bracket .)The tool was actually much easier to use than I expected once I had my pay stub in front of me.
CosmicCaptain
2 One important thing nobody has mentioned - there are situations where filing separately can protect you. If ur spouse has shady tax history or might have errors you don't know about, filing separately means you're not liable for their mistakes. My friend's husband didn't report some crypto gains and she got dragged into the mess even tho she had no idea! Just something to consider beyond just the $$$ amount.
0 coins
CosmicCaptain
ā¢8 This is such an important point! Filing separately can also be important if you're separating or having relationship problems but not yet divorced. Jointly means jointly liable in most cases.
0 coins
Kyle Wallace
Great discussion here! I'm a CPA and wanted to add that while the software comparison tools mentioned are helpful, they sometimes miss nuanced situations. For example, if one spouse has significant medical expenses (over 7.5% of AGI), filing separately might allow that spouse to deduct more medical expenses on a lower individual income vs. the combined income when filing jointly. Also, don't forget about state tax implications - some states don't allow you to file separately if you filed jointly federally, or vice versa. Always check your specific state's rules before making the final decision. The tax software tools are great starting points, but for complex situations (multiple income sources, significant deductions, rental properties, etc.), it might be worth consulting with a tax professional who can run scenarios beyond what the basic comparison tools show.
0 coins
Keisha Taylor
ā¢This is exactly the kind of professional insight I was hoping to see! The medical expense threshold is something I never would have thought about. Quick question - when you mention consulting a tax professional for complex situations, do you think it's worth it even if the software comparison shows filing jointly saves more money? Like, could there still be hidden benefits to filing separately that the software might miss?
0 coins