


Ask the community...
In my experience as someone who's worked in tax prep before, I can tell you that many tax preparers at the chain locations are seasonal employees who've taken a basic tax course. They're trained to handle common scenarios but often miss specialized rules like the married filing separately Roth IRA limitation. If you're dealing with something like retirement account contribution issues, you really need either a CPA or an Enrolled Agent who specializes in that area. The difference in knowledge and expertise is huge. For fixing your previous years, I'd recommend: 1) Determine which tax years you need to address (generally the last 3 years can be amended) 2) Calculate the excess contributions for each year 3) Contact your IRA custodian about removing excess contributions 4) File Form 5329 for each year to report the excess contributions 5) Consider whether filing amended returns to change from MFS to MFJ makes sense
This is really helpful, thank you! Do you think it's better to amend the returns to married filing jointly or just remove the excess contributions? We've been filing separately because my spouse has an income-based student loan repayment plan, so filing jointly would increase those payments. But maybe the Roth IRA penalties would be worse?
Whether to amend to MFJ or remove excess contributions depends on your complete financial picture. You need to calculate both scenarios to see which costs less overall. For the student loan consideration, calculate how much the income-based payments would increase if filing jointly versus the cost of Roth IRA penalties (6% per year on excess contributions) plus any potential tax benefits lost by filing separately. Sometimes it's cheaper to pay higher student loan payments for a year than pay IRS penalties and miss out on tax credits only available to joint filers. This is definitely a situation where running the numbers both ways is essential before deciding.
Has anyone actually received a penalty notice from the IRS specifically for excess Roth contributions while married filing separately? I've been doing this for 3 years not knowing about the limit, and now I'm worried but haven't received any notices.
Yes, I got hit with this exact situation last year. The IRS sent me a CP2000 notice about unreported income, and during that review, they flagged my Roth contributions while I was MFS with income over $10k. Ended up with penalties for 3 years of contributions plus interest. It was a mess to clean up, so I recommend being proactive before they find it.
Don't forget to also deduct the closing costs from your recent sale too! You mentioned you had costs associated with the sale - those reduce your selling price when calculating gain. So your calculation should be: (Sale price - selling costs) - (Purchase price + purchase closing costs) = Capital gain For example, if you sold for $30k but had $6k in selling costs, your amount realized is $24k. If you bought for $10k plus $4k in buying costs, your basis is $14k. So your gain would be $24k - $14
Thanks for breaking it down like that! So would real estate commissions count as selling costs? And do I need specific documentation for all this or can I just put the numbers in when I file?
Yes, real estate commissions definitely count as selling costs! They're usually one of the biggest deductions from your sale proceeds. Other selling costs that reduce your amount realized include legal fees, transfer taxes, and any seller-paid closing costs. Documentation is important. You should keep your closing statements from both the purchase and sale (HUD-1 forms or Closing Disclosures), plus receipts for any improvements you made to the property. You don't submit these with your tax return, but you'll need them if you're ever audited. When you file, you'll report this on Schedule D and possibly Form 8949, depending on your situation.
What tax form do you use to report land sale? I sold some acres last year and my tax software confused me.
You'll report it on Schedule D (Capital Gains and Losses) and possibly Form 8949 (Sales and Other Dispositions of Capital Assets) depending on your situation. Most tax software will guide you through this when you indicate you sold land or real estate. The important thing is to have your purchase information (date, cost, closing costs) and your sale information (date, proceeds, selling expenses) ready.
22 A lot of insurance agents don't fully understand the tax implications of their products. When I surrendered my policy, the agent told me "you might have to pay taxes on it" but couldn't explain how much would be taxable. Quick rule of thumb: you pay taxes on (what you get) minus (what you put in). The insurance company should send you a 1099-R form that will show the taxable amount, but it's good to understand how it's calculated so you can verify it's correct. Sometimes insurance companies make mistakes too.
10 Is there any way to reduce the tax hit? I'm thinking about surrendering a policy but worried about having to pay a lot in taxes. Can I roll it over into something else tax-free?
22 Yes, you have a couple options to potentially reduce or defer the tax impact. If your policy qualifies, you could do what's called a 1035 exchange into an annuity or another life insurance policy. This allows you to transfer the cash value without triggering immediate taxation. Another option is to see if your policy allows for partial surrenders over multiple tax years instead of taking all the money at once. This can spread the tax liability across different years and potentially keep you in a lower tax bracket. Just be aware that each partial surrender can affect your overall basis calculation in complex ways.
15 Has anyone ever dealt with surrender fees when cancelling a whole life policy? I'm in a similar situation but my policy shows I'll lose about 12% of the value to surrender charges. Wondering if those fees are tax deductible since they reduce what I actually receive.
One option nobody's mentioned is to just redesignate that transfer retroactively. I'm also an S-Corp owner and my accountant told me I can document that initial transfer as a "shareholder advance" that will be counted toward my reasonable salary when I run payroll. Basically, you're pre-paying yourself, and when you run payroll, you just need to account for taxes and issue yourself a smaller net paycheck since you've already received most of the money. Just make sure your payroll service knows how to handle this correctly, and you'll need good documentation. I do this regularly - take money when I need it, then formalize it through payroll later.
Is this really legit though? Don't you have to run actual payroll with proper tax withholdings at the time you take the money? I've been stressing about making sure everything is by-the-book with my new S-Corp.
This is absolutely legitimate as long as you properly document and account for everything. When you run payroll, you'll calculate the full gross salary amount, withhold all required taxes, and then reduce the net check by the amount you already advanced yourself. For example, if your reasonable salary is $5,000 monthly and you already took $3,000 as an advance, when you run payroll, you'll still calculate taxes on the full $5,000, but the net check would only be around $2,000 (minus the taxes on the full amount). This ensures all proper employment taxes are paid on your full reasonable compensation. Just make sure your payroll system can handle this "adjustment" or "reimbursement" properly.
My CPA told me this isn't actually as big a deal as people make it out to be for a new S-Corp with only a few months of operation. As long as you establish a reasonable salary before the end of the tax year and properly document everything, minor sequence mistakes in your first year typically won't trigger an audit. The reasonable compensation test is primarily looking at the entire tax year picture, not whether you took a specific distribution a few weeks before establishing payroll. Just don't make it a habit going forward!
Agreed! I did something similar my first year and my accountant just had me document everything carefully. The important thing is the year-end picture looks right. S-Corps get in trouble when they take massive distributions and tiny salaries over the course of entire years, not when they make minor timing errors while learning the ropes.
Jamal Wilson
I think everyone is overlooking something important here. If your mother is still alive, why not just deed the property back to her and let HER sell it directly? Then she could distribute the money however she wants without you being in the middle. This would eliminate your tax liability completely since you wouldn't be the seller. I had to do something similar with my grandfather's property a few years ago - we realized the tax implications of the gift to me were bad, so we reversed it before selling.
0 coins
NebulaNova
β’That would have been a good option, but it's too late now - I already sold the property about 6 months ago. I was just hoping there might be a way to avoid getting stuck with a big tax bill since I was basically just following my mom's instructions and didn't keep any of the profits.
0 coins
Jamal Wilson
β’That's unfortunate timing. For future reference (or for anyone else reading this thread), always consult with a tax professional BEFORE making property transfers between family members. These transactions are complex and can have significant tax consequences. Since the sale has already happened, your best option now is probably to gather all documentation showing that you were acting on your mother's behalf. While this doesn't eliminate your tax liability, good documentation might help if there's ever an audit. Make sure you have the quitclaim deed, documentation of the original basis (purchase price plus improvements), the sales contract, and proof that you transferred the proceeds to your mother and other family members.
0 coins
Mei Lin
Couldn't the OP potentially argue this was a "step transaction" where they were essentially just acting as an agent for their mother? Since the mother is still alive and OP immediately gave all the money back to her and the other family members per her instructions, maybe the IRS would consider the mother the true seller?
0 coins
Mateo Hernandez
β’The step transaction doctrine actually might work against OP in this case. The IRS could view the series of transactions (mother gifts to OP, OP sells and distributes money) as an attempt to avoid proper tax treatment. Since the legal ownership was transferred to OP before the sale, OP is technically the seller for tax purposes. The subsequent distribution of funds is considered separate. This arrangement actually creates more tax complications than if the mother had sold it directly and then gifted portions of the proceeds. What might help OP's case is documenting that they were acting under a power of attorney or as a fiduciary for their mother, but that would need to have been established properly before these transactions occurred.
0 coins