This is a really important issue that affects local tax revenue and fairness. I've seen similar situations in my area where religious organizations were claiming exemptions on properties that clearly didn't qualify. One thing to keep in mind is that even if a church owns property, each individual property needs to meet the exemption criteria independently. Just because the organization has tax-exempt status doesn't automatically exempt every piece of real estate they own. The "primary use" test is critical - if these houses are primarily being used as rental income properties rather than for religious purposes, they should be on the tax rolls. I'd suggest starting with your county's online property records system (most counties have these now) to confirm the current exemption status and see what exemption code is being used. This will help you understand exactly what the church is claiming and give you specific information when you contact the assessor's office. Also, don't hesitate to reach out to your city council member or county commissioner if you don't get a satisfactory response from the assessor's office initially. Elected officials are often very responsive to property tax fairness issues since it directly impacts local budgets and services. Good luck with this - you're doing the right thing by looking into it!

I actually work in property tax assessment, and this is exactly the kind of situation we see frequently. What you're describing sounds like a clear case of improper exemption use. Religious organizations can only claim property tax exemptions on properties that are used "exclusively for religious purposes" - and that specifically excludes income-producing rental properties. The fact that these houses are actively being advertised for rent and the church isn't even local makes this particularly egregious. In our jurisdiction, we've found that some organizations deliberately purchase rental properties in different cities to avoid scrutiny from their home congregation or local officials. Here's my advice: Before you contact anyone, gather solid documentation. Take screenshots of any rental listings with dates, print out the property records showing the church as owner, and note the exemption codes being used. Most county assessor websites will show you exactly what exemption is being claimed. When you call the assessor's office, ask specifically for the "Exemptions Review Department" and mention you want to report a "potential improper religious exemption on rental property." Use those exact words - it will get you to the right person faster. They take these reports seriously because improper exemptions directly impact county revenue and shift the tax burden to other property owners. Don't worry about seeming petty or anti-religious - you're helping ensure tax law is applied fairly to everyone.

This thread has been incredibly educational! As someone who gets quarterly bonuses, I've been wondering about this exact strategy for months. What I'm taking away is that it's really about understanding your complete tax picture rather than just focusing on the bonus withholding rate. The safe harbor threshold discussion has been eye-opening - I had no idea about the 90%/100%/110% rules. It sounds like that's the make-or-break factor for whether this strategy helps or hurts you financially. One question I haven't seen addressed: for those who have successfully used this strategy, how do you track your withholding throughout the year to make sure you stay above the safe harbor thresholds? Do you use spreadsheets, apps, or just check the IRS estimator periodically? I'm leaning toward trying this for my Q1 bonus next year (giving me plenty of time to course-correct if needed), but I want to make sure I have a good system for monitoring my total withholding situation. The penalty stories have definitely convinced me that winging it is not an option! Thanks to everyone who shared their actual numbers and experiences - this is exactly the kind of practical financial discussion I was hoping to find in this community.

This has been such a comprehensive discussion! As someone who just joined this community, I'm amazed at the depth of real-world experience everyone has shared. What really resonates with me is how this thread evolved from a simple "is this a good idea?" question to a nuanced exploration of when and how this strategy might work. The emphasis on safe harbor thresholds, timing considerations, and the importance of tracking your total tax picture throughout the year has been incredibly educational. I'm particularly grateful for the actual numbers people shared - like the example of paying $180 in penalties to earn $45 in investment returns. Those concrete examples make the risks so much clearer than abstract warnings about "potential penalties." As someone who's always been intimidated by tax optimization strategies, this discussion has given me a much better framework for thinking about these decisions. The three key questions that @OmarHassan outlined seem like a great starting point for anyone considering this approach. I think the biggest takeaway for me is that there's no universal "right" answer - it really depends on your specific situation, timing, and discipline. Thanks to everyone who took the time to share their experiences and hard-learned lessons!

I've been following this thread and your situation really resonates with me - I went through something very similar last year with a different preparer and the stress was overwhelming! One thing I wanted to add that hasn't been mentioned yet: if you do end up discovering they never filed, make sure to document the exact date you find out. This becomes important if you need to file a complaint or dispute charges later. Also, if you have to file yourself as a backup plan, you can include a statement with your return explaining the circumstances (though this is more for your own records than anything the IRS requires). Another tip - when you visit tomorrow, pay attention to how busy their office seems and whether other clients appear to be having similar issues. If you see other frustrated people waiting around or overhear complaints about lack of communication, that might tell you this is a pattern rather than an isolated incident with your case. I'm really hoping this turns out to be just poor communication on their part and that they can immediately show you the IRS acknowledgment. The fact that you found the signed Form 8879 is definitely encouraging! You've gotten such excellent advice from everyone here, and your proactive approach to following up is exactly right. Whatever happens tomorrow, you'll have clarity and a path forward. Wishing you the best of luck - please definitely update us!

I can definitely relate to your anxiety about this situation! The combination of late filing, owing money, and poor communication from your preparer is incredibly stressful. A few practical suggestions while you prepare for your office visit tomorrow: **Document everything now:** Take screenshots of all your text messages with the preparer, note down dates/times of calls, and gather any paperwork they gave you. If this goes south, you'll want a clear timeline. **Bank account check:** Look specifically for "Electronic Funds Withdrawal" or "EFW" transactions in your pending/scheduled payments section. These often don't show up in regular transaction history until they're actually processed. **Know your rights:** If they can't produce that IRS e-file acknowledgment with confirmation number tomorrow, don't let them string you along with promises to "look into it" or "email it later." That document should be immediately accessible if they actually filed. **Backup plan ready:** If you discover they never filed, you can still submit your 2022 return yourself using tax software. The failure-to-file penalty is much steeper than failure-to-pay, so getting something submitted stops the worst penalties even if you still owe money. The signed Form 8879 you mentioned is definitely a good sign that they intended to file electronically. Hopefully this is just a case of terrible client communication rather than actual fraud. Stay strong - you're doing everything right by following up proactively rather than just hoping for the best. Looking forward to your update after tomorrow's visit!

As someone who's been through multiple partnership audits over the years, I can confirm that the IRS has definitely ramped up scrutiny on these management fee arrangements. What really matters is substance over form - they're looking at whether the S-Corp partners are truly providing services in a non-partner capacity or if it's just a tax-driven structure. A few practical points that might help with your decision: 1. Document everything - if you stick with management fees, make sure you have formal management agreements, separate invoicing, and can demonstrate the services are distinct from normal partner duties. 2. Consider the "but for" test - would you hire an unrelated third party to perform these same services if the S-Corps weren't partners? If not, that suggests partner capacity. 3. The SE tax savings from management fees aren't as significant as they used to be, especially with the 0.9% additional Medicare tax on high earners. Given the increased enforcement focus and the relatively minimal tax differences, I'd lean toward following your new CPA's advice. The audit protection alone is probably worth more than any potential tax savings from the management fee structure. One last tip - whatever you decide, apply it consistently going forward. The IRS really doesn't like taxpayers who bounce between different treatments for the same economic arrangements.

This has been such an educational thread! I'm relatively new to partnership taxation and had no idea there were so many nuances to the management fee vs guaranteed payment distinction. What really stands out to me from all these comments is how the tax landscape seems to have shifted significantly in recent years. The increased IRS scrutiny, the compliance campaigns targeting partnerships, and the audit experiences people have shared all point to guaranteed payments being the safer approach for most situations. I'm particularly interested in the documentation requirements mentioned by several commenters. It sounds like if you're going to stick with management fees, you really need to have your ducks in a row with formal agreements and clear evidence that the services are being provided in a non-partner capacity. That level of documentation and the ongoing audit risk might not be worth the relatively small tax differences. For those who have made the transition from management fees to guaranteed payments - how long did the process typically take from decision to implementation? I'm trying to get a sense of the timeline involved, especially with all the partnership agreement amendments and coordination between different tax preparers that several people mentioned. Also, has anyone dealt with this issue in the context of family partnerships or situations where some partners are more active in management than others? I'm wondering if that adds any additional complexity to the classification analysis.

As someone who's also new to understanding IRS transcripts, this entire discussion has been absolutely enlightening! I encountered Code 290 on my transcript recently and, like many others here, was initially concerned by the "additional tax assessed" language. But after reading through all these detailed explanations and personal experiences, I now understand it's simply the IRS's standard documentation for tax liability assessment. What I found most helpful was learning to read the codes chronologically to understand the complete story of my return's processing. The practical tips about checking for $0.00 amounts (indicating routine processing), comparing posting dates to filing dates, and looking for accompanying codes like 971 or 846 have given me a solid framework for interpreting my transcript. I'm particularly grateful for the recommendation of IRS Publication 4803 - having an official reference guide makes everything feel much less intimidating. It's amazing how this community has transformed what seemed like mysterious government codes into an understandable, logical system. Thank you all for creating such a supportive environment where newcomers can learn from your experiences without feeling embarrassed about not knowing these things initially! For other newcomers who might be reading this, the key takeaway seems to be: don't panic over Code 290, especially if it shows $0.00 and appeared shortly after filing - it's most likely just routine processing confirmation.

As a newcomer to this community and someone who just started dealing with tax transcripts myself, I want to express my gratitude for this incredibly comprehensive discussion! I was in the exact same boat as the original poster - recently retired and completely confused when I saw Code 290 on my transcript for the first time. The "additional tax assessed" language immediately made me think I had done something wrong or owed additional money. Reading through everyone's experiences has been like taking a crash course in transcript interpretation. The key insights that really helped me understand my own situation were: • Code 290 with $0.00 shortly after filing = routine processing confirmation • The importance of reading codes chronologically to see the "story" of your return • Checking the posting date relative to your filing date for context • Looking for accompanying codes like 971 (notices) or 846 (refunds) to complete the picture I've bookmarked IRS Publication 4803 as recommended and feel so much more confident about interpreting these codes now. It's amazing how what initially seemed like cryptic government language is actually a logical documentation system once you understand the basics. For other newcomers who might stumble across this thread: don't panic when you see Code 290! If it shows $0.00 and appeared within a few weeks of filing, you're almost certainly looking at routine processing. This community has done an outstanding job of turning a confusing topic into understandable, actionable guidance. Thank you all for sharing your knowledge so generously!