


Ask the community...
3 Watch out - I thought I was being clever by taking a small salary from my S-Corp ($40K) when I was actually making about $250K in profits. Got audited and ended up having to reclassify a bunch of my distributions as wages, pay back payroll taxes plus penalties. Cost me about $32K in total. My new CPA says there's no hard rule but they typically want to see at least 50-60% of profits as reasonable compensation depending on your industry. Also differs based on how labor vs. capital intensive your business is.
7 Oh yikes, that's exactly what I'm worried about. How did they determine what was "reasonable" in your case? Did they give you specific criteria or just decide 40K wasn't enough?
They looked at several factors: what similar marketing agency owners in my area were paying themselves (they used Bureau of Labor Statistics data and some industry surveys), how many hours I was working (basically full-time), and the fact that most of my business income was directly from my personal services rather than passive investments or equipment. They also noted that I was the only employee doing the high-level work. The auditor said 40K was "unreasonably low" for someone generating 250K in a service business where I was essentially the primary revenue generator. They reclassified about 80K of my distributions as wages. The lesson I learned is that in service businesses especially, you can't get away with tiny salaries because most of the profit is directly tied to your labor.
The fundamental difference is corporate governance and tax structure. Public company CEOs who take $1 salaries have their compensation packages approved by independent boards of directors and compensation committees, which provides legitimacy in the eyes of regulators. Their stock options and RSUs are still subject to ordinary income tax rates when exercised/vested, plus the company pays payroll taxes on the fair market value. Small business owners face different scrutiny because S-Corp distributions avoid self-employment taxes (15.3% savings), while CEO stock compensation doesn't provide the same tax avoidance opportunity. The IRS specifically targets owner-operators who might abuse this structure. The "reasonable compensation" test for small businesses considers: your role and responsibilities, hours worked, business profits attributable to your personal services vs. capital, and what you'd pay a non-owner to do your job. There's no magic percentage - it's truly case-by-case based on these factors. Bottom line: Big company CEOs aren't actually avoiding taxes with their structure, they're just deferring timing. Small business owners using minimal salaries are potentially avoiding payroll taxes entirely, which is why the IRS watches it more closely.
This is really helpful - the governance aspect makes a lot of sense. I hadn't considered that public company boards provide that independent oversight layer. So essentially the IRS trusts that independent directors wouldn't approve unreasonable compensation, but they can't make that same assumption for self-dealing small business owners. Your point about deferring vs. avoiding taxes is key too. I was thinking the CEOs were getting some magical tax benefit, but they're just shifting when they pay, not whether they pay. Meanwhile I'd actually be avoiding those payroll taxes entirely on the distribution portion. Do you know if there are any safe harbors or specific documentation practices that help justify your reasonable compensation decision to the IRS if questioned?
There aren't official IRS "safe harbors" for reasonable compensation, but there are definitely documentation practices that help if you get audited. I'd recommend keeping records that support your compensation decision: 1) Industry salary surveys or BLS data showing comparable positions in your area 2) Documentation of your actual duties and time commitment 3) Analysis of how much business income comes from your personal services vs. business assets/capital 4) Records of any third-party validation (like compensation studies or CPA recommendations) Some CPAs recommend doing an annual "reasonable compensation study" that documents these factors. It won't guarantee you won't get questioned, but it shows you made a good faith effort to comply rather than just picking an arbitrary low number. The closest thing to a safe harbor is probably ensuring your salary isn't drastically lower than what you'd find on job sites for similar roles in your industry/location. If you're within a reasonable range of market rates and can document why, you're in much better shape than someone paying themselves 20% of market value just to minimize taxes.
Looking at your situation, the $95 deduction increase after 3 months is very likely due to your benefits kicking in after your probationary period! Most companies start health insurance, dental, vision, and retirement plan contributions at the 90-day mark. Here's what those acronyms typically mean: - **Fed MWH** = Federal Medicare Withholding (though this seems unusual - Medicare is usually shown as FICA-Med) - **FICA-SS** = Social Security tax (6.2% of your gross pay) - **FICA-Med** = Medicare tax (1.45% of your gross pay) - **SIT** = State Income Tax The jump from $70 to $95 ($25 increase) could easily be explained by health insurance premiums starting. A typical employer health plan might cost $25-50+ per paycheck depending on your coverage level. I'd suggest logging into your employee portal or asking HR for a breakdown of your current benefit elections. You probably signed up for health insurance during orientation but it didn't start deducting until now. This is totally normal and nothing to worry about - just means your benefits are finally active!
This is super helpful, thank you! That makes total sense about the benefits kicking in after probation. I was wondering why there was such a specific timing with the increase. One quick question though - you mentioned Fed MWH might be unusual for Medicare withholding. On my stub it shows both "Fed MWH" AND "FICA-Med" as separate line items. Could Fed MWH be something else? Maybe Federal Mandatory Withholding for income tax instead of Medicare? I'm trying to figure out which specific deduction accounts for the bulk of that $25 increase. I'll definitely check our employee portal this week to see the breakdown of my benefit elections. Really appreciate you taking the time to explain this!
You're absolutely right! If you're seeing both "Fed MWH" and "FICA-Med" as separate line items, then "Fed MWH" is almost certainly Federal Mandatory Withholding for your income tax, not Medicare. That makes much more sense. So you've got: - Fed MWH = Federal income tax withholding - FICA-Med = Medicare tax (1.45%) - FICA-SS = Social Security tax (6.2%) - SIT = State income tax The $25 increase is most likely your health insurance premium starting, but it could also be a combination of health insurance plus other benefits like dental/vision (which might be $5-10 each) or even a small 401k contribution if you enrolled in that. When you check your employee portal, look for a section called something like "Current Deductions," "Benefit Elections," or "Payroll Deductions." It should show you exactly what benefits you're enrolled in and how much each one costs per paycheck. That'll solve the mystery once and for all!
I had the exact same confusion when I started my current job! Those acronyms can be really overwhelming at first. Based on what you're describing, the $95 increase after 3 months is almost definitely your benefits kicking in post-probation period. Here's a quick breakdown of those common acronyms: - **Fed MWH** = Federal Mandatory Withholding (your federal income tax) - **FICA-SS** = Social Security tax (6.2% of gross pay) - **FICA-Med** = Medicare tax (1.45% of gross pay) - **SIT** = State Income Tax The jump from ~$70 to $95 is totally normal when health insurance starts. My company's basic health plan was about $28 per paycheck, and if you added dental/vision that could easily account for your $25 increase. Don't feel awkward about asking HR - they deal with these questions constantly and would much rather explain it clearly than have you worry about incorrect deductions. Most companies also have detailed benefit statements available in their employee portals that break everything down without the confusing acronyms. You're definitely not alone in finding this stuff confusing - paycheck deductions are like learning a whole new language!
This is such a reassuring response, thank you! It's good to know I'm not the only one who found paycheck acronyms confusing at first. The timing really does make sense now - I definitely remember signing up for health insurance during my orientation but completely forgot it wouldn't start until after probation. $28 for basic health coverage sounds about right for what I might be seeing. I think I also opted into dental during enrollment, so that plus health insurance could easily explain the $25 jump. You're absolutely right about just asking HR directly. I've been overthinking this and making it more complicated than it needs to be. I'll check our employee portal first to see if I can find that detailed breakdown you mentioned, and if I still have questions, I'll just bite the bullet and ask. Thanks for the encouragement - sometimes you just need someone to tell you it's okay to ask the "obvious" questions!
Has your wife checked if you're accidentally claiming some deduction or credit that's a major audit trigger? For years I kept getting letters because I was mixing up the American Opportunity Credit and Lifetime Learning Credit for my kids' education expenses.
I've been through this exact same frustrating cycle! Got audited three years in a row before figuring out what was happening. In my case, it turned out to be a combination of two issues: my employer kept making small errors on my W-2 (like reporting $52,347 instead of $52,374) and I was inconsistently rounding numbers on my return. The IRS computer systems are incredibly sensitive to mismatches. Even if your actual tax liability is correct, any discrepancy between what you report and what third parties (employers, banks, etc.) report to the IRS can trigger verification requests. Here's what finally helped me: I started pulling my wage and income transcripts from the IRS website BEFORE filing my return to see exactly what information they already had on file. Then I made sure my return matched those numbers precisely - no rounding, no "close enough" estimates. Also worth noting - if you've moved recently or changed jobs, make sure all your addresses are consistent across all forms. The IRS uses address matching as one way to verify identity, and any inconsistencies can flag your return for additional review. Since making these changes, I haven't had a single audit or verification request in over four years. Sometimes it really is just about being more precise with the details rather than anything being fundamentally wrong with your return.
This is incredibly helpful advice! I never thought about pulling the wage and income transcripts beforehand to check what the IRS already has on file. That's such a smart way to avoid mismatches. Do you know roughly how long before filing season those transcripts become available? I want to make sure I can access them early enough to compare before we prepare our return.
I worked through a $55k tax debt over 4 years. What really helped me was increasing my withholding at work so I'd get bigger refunds each year that would apply to my debt. Also made sure to claim every legitimate deduction and credit. Made a huge difference in how quickly the balance went down. Good luck!!
I went through something very similar a few years back - owed about $72k to the IRS and it felt completely overwhelming. The fact that you're already on a payment plan and making consistent payments is huge, so don't underestimate that progress you've made. One thing that really helped me was requesting a Collection Information Statement review. Even though I was on a payment plan, my financial situation had changed since I first set it up, and I was able to get my monthly payment reduced from $2,100 to $1,400 based on updated income and necessary expenses. The IRS is more flexible than people think if you can document legitimate financial hardship. Also, definitely look into penalty abatement if you haven't already. I got first-time penalty abatement for some years and reasonable cause abatement for others, which knocked about $8,000 off my total balance. Even if you've had issues in the past, there might be specific circumstances that qualify for relief. Keep making those payments and stay in communication with the IRS - you're on the right track even though it feels like a mountain to climb right now.
This is really encouraging to hear from someone who's been through such a similar situation! I hadn't thought about requesting a Collection Information Statement review since I'm already on a payment plan, but that makes total sense - my expenses have definitely increased since I first set this up. The penalty abatement angle is interesting too. I know I probably don't qualify for first-time abatement since this spans multiple years of issues, but I wonder if there might be reasonable cause situations I could explore. Did you handle the penalty abatement requests yourself or work with a professional? The whole process can be pretty intimidating when you're dealing with this much money. Thanks for the encouragement - some days it really does feel like I'm barely making a dent in this mountain of debt, but hearing success stories like yours helps keep me motivated to stick with it.
Sofia Martinez
Has anyone here actually converted from an S Corp to a C Corp? I'm worried about the practical aspects. Like do I need to get a new EIN? Will my bank accounts need to change? How complicated is the actual filing process?
0 coins
Dmitry Volkov
ā¢I did this last year. You keep the same EIN, and your bank accounts can stay the same. You just file Form 8832 to elect C Corp taxation. It's surprisingly straightforward - the hard part is understanding the tax implications, not the actual paperwork.
0 coins
Leeann Blackstein
Great discussion here! I'm actually in the middle of making this exact decision for my consulting business. From what I'm reading, it sounds like C Corp is definitely the way to go for avoiding pass-through income, but I'm curious about one practical aspect - how do you all handle the "reasonable salary" requirement? The IRS wants you to pay yourself a reasonable W-2 salary, but I'm not sure how to benchmark what's "reasonable" for my industry. Do you just look at comparable roles at other companies? And if I set my salary too low initially, can I adjust it mid-year without raising red flags? I want to optimize the split between salary and retained earnings, but obviously don't want to invite an audit. Also, for those who went the C Corp route - did you notice any issues with business banking or getting loans? Some people have told me that C Corps can be more complicated for small business financing.
0 coins
Ethan Clark
ā¢For reasonable salary benchmarking, I use a combination of Bureau of Labor Statistics data for my role/location and industry salary surveys. The key is documenting your research - save screenshots of comparable positions and salary ranges so you can justify your decision if questioned. You can definitely adjust your salary mid-year, but it's cleaner to do it at the beginning of a quarter and document the business reason (like taking on new responsibilities or market rate changes). The IRS generally looks at the total compensation over the year, not monthly fluctuations. Regarding business banking and loans - I haven't had any issues. If anything, having a C Corp structure made me look more established to lenders. The key is keeping clean books and having proper corporate formalities in place. Some banks actually prefer working with C Corps because the liability structure is clearer.
0 coins