If you're just trying to avoid fees, another option is to pull the money rather than push it. Log into the destination bank account and set up the other account as an external account, then initiate the transfer from there. Many banks don't charge for this if you're pulling money in. When I was funding my down payment, I linked my accounts this way and moved about $45k without any fees at all. Just took about 3 business days to process.

I've been through this exact situation multiple times and learned some hard lessons. Here's what I wish I'd known: First, don't use friends as intermediaries - it WILL create tax headaches for them even if no actual taxes are owed. The 1099-K reporting threshold means they'll get paperwork they have to deal with. Instead, try these alternatives in order: 1. External account linking (pull from destination bank) - usually free 2. ACH transfer - slower but typically no fees 3. Cashier's check to yourself - small fee but no reporting issues 4. Just pay the wire fee if it's a large amount I made the friend mistake once with a $12k transfer and my buddy ended up having to file extra paperwork and keep documentation for years. The $25 wire fee would have been so much simpler. Also, keep detailed records of ANY large transfers between your accounts - source, destination, dates, amounts. Even though it's your money, large movements can trigger reviews, and having clean documentation makes everything easier if questions come up later. The key is thinking beyond just avoiding fees - you want to avoid creating unnecessary complications for yourself or others down the road.

This is an excellent discussion that covers most of the key issues! I wanted to add a practical tip that helped me when I dealt with a similar situation last year. When preparing the final K-1 for Partner C, I found it helpful to include a supplemental schedule that breaks down the liquidation transaction in plain English. This included: 1. Opening capital account balance: ($38,000) 2. Cash distribution received: $32,000 3. Resulting capital account before adjustment: ($70,000) 4. Deemed contribution to restore deficit: $70,000 5. Final capital account balance: $0 6. Total taxable gain to Partner C: $70,000 This schedule made it crystal clear to Partner C's tax preparer exactly how we arrived at the $70,000 taxable gain, and it provided a clean audit trail if the IRS ever questions the treatment. One additional consideration - make sure your partnership's accounting system properly reflects the reallocation of Partner C's negative capital balance to the remaining partners. This adjustment affects their outside basis going forward and could impact future distributions or liquidations. I learned this lesson when we had to prepare amended K-1s because we initially forgot to update the remaining partners' capital accounts to reflect their absorption of Partner C's deficit. The documentation suggestions from previous commenters are spot-on - partnership liquidations definitely warrant extra attention to detail!

This has been an incredibly thorough discussion! As someone who's dealt with several partnership liquidations over the years, I wanted to add one more consideration that can sometimes trip people up - the impact on guaranteed payments or preferred returns. If Partner C had any guaranteed payments or preferred return arrangements that were accrued but unpaid at the time of liquidation, those need to be properly characterized and reported separately from the liquidating distribution. These amounts would typically be reported as ordinary income to Partner C rather than capital gain treatment, and they wouldn't be part of the capital account restoration calculation. Also, for future reference, it's worth noting that if your partnership has been making Section 754 elections in prior years, you'll want to carefully review whether any previous basis adjustments need to be taken into account when calculating the final distribution amounts. This is particularly important if the partnership has appreciated assets, as the inside/outside basis differences can affect the tax consequences of the liquidation. One final practical tip - consider having Partner C sign an acknowledgment that they understand the tax implications of receiving the liquidating distribution, especially the $70,000 gain recognition. This can help prevent disputes later if they're surprised by the tax bill. I've seen situations where departing partners thought they were just receiving "their money back" and didn't realize they'd have a significant tax liability. Great work everyone on covering all the technical aspects so thoroughly!

One thing I haven't seen mentioned yet is the impact on your parent's Social Security benefits if they're already receiving them. Since this income would be considered earned income, it could affect their Social Security benefits if they're under full retirement age. For 2024, if your parent is under full retirement age and receiving Social Security, they can earn up to $22,320 without any reduction in benefits. But if they earn more than that, Social Security will reduce their benefits by $1 for every $2 earned above the limit. This is something to factor into your payment calculations alongside the ACA subsidy impacts. Also, even though you're exempt from federal employment taxes, your parent might still want to consider making voluntary Social Security contributions if they're not already maxed out on their credits. They can do this by paying self-employment tax on the income (treating it as self-employment income instead of wages), which might be beneficial for their long-term Social Security benefits.

This is such a complex situation with multiple moving parts! I went through something similar when hiring my sister to watch my kids. One thing that really helped me was creating a simple decision matrix to weigh all the factors everyone's mentioned here. For your mom's situation specifically - earning $40,000 total with Social Security at 64 - the benefit reduction could be substantial as GalaxyGlider calculated. But remember this isn't necessarily "lost" money - it's more like forced savings. When she reaches full retirement age, Social Security will recalculate her benefits to account for the months they were reduced, which increases her future monthly payments. That said, you might want to consider a hybrid approach: maybe start with a lower payment amount (say $8,000 annually instead of $12,000) to keep her closer to the earnings limit, and supplement with non-cash benefits like covering her gas, providing meals, or other family support that isn't considered earned income. Also, definitely verify her current Social Security status - if she's already at full retirement age, the earnings limit doesn't apply at all, which would change the entire calculation!

I feel your pain with BNA! I've been using it for about 2 years now and it's definitely not intuitive. One thing that really helped me was reaching out to other users in my local CPA chapter - turns out several firms in our area had similar struggles when they first switched over. For S-Corp data entry specifically, I found it helpful to print out the input screens the first few times and mark which fields are required vs optional. BNA's interface doesn't make this clear, and I wasted hours trying to figure out why scenarios wouldn't run properly due to missing data in seemingly unimportant fields. Also, don't feel bad about asking for help! Most of us went through this same learning curve. The software is powerful once you get past the initial frustration, but Bloomberg definitely could have designed it to be more user-friendly. Have you tried reaching out to other tax preparers in your area who might be using it?

I completely understand your BNA frustrations! I've been working with tax software for over a decade and BNA definitely has one of the steepest learning curves I've encountered. The good news is that once you get through the initial pain, it really is quite powerful for complex planning scenarios. For your S-Corp issues, I'd recommend starting with their "Entity Setup Wizard" if you haven't already - it's buried under Tools > Wizards but it walks you through all the required fields in a logical order. This prevents the random error messages you get when trying to enter data manually. Regarding depreciation modeling, make sure you're using the "Asset Comparison" feature rather than trying to manually switch methods between scenarios. Go to Planning > Asset Analysis > Comparison Tool and you can set up side-by-side comparisons of different depreciation methods for the same assets. This keeps your baseline data intact while showing the tax impact of each approach. One resource that's been invaluable for me is the BNA Tax & Accounting User Forum on LinkedIn - it's an active group where users share tips and troubleshoot issues together. Much more helpful than their official documentation! You're definitely not alone in this struggle.

I'm confused about one thing - are these really "overlapping" if they're from different sources? Like the 1099-NEC is from your client showing they paid you, and the 1099-K is from the payment processor showing money moved through their system. Aren't they documenting different aspects of the same transaction?

I went through this exact situation two years ago and can confirm it's not as scary as it seems! The key thing to remember is that the IRS computer systems are actually pretty sophisticated at identifying these overlaps. What I did was keep a simple spreadsheet showing each payment - the date, amount, client name, and which forms reported it (1099-NEC, 1099-K, or both). This made it super easy to see the total actual income versus what appeared to be "double reporting." On my Schedule C, I just reported my true total income from all clients. The IRS matching system will see that your reported income is reasonable compared to the information returns they received, even if those returns overlap. One thing that gave me peace of mind was talking to my tax preparer about it. She said this happens all the time now with payment processors being required to issue more 1099-Ks. The IRS has definitely seen this pattern before and has procedures to handle it. Keep all your bank statements and client contracts as backup documentation, but honestly you probably won't need them. The system works better than most people think!