2023 Tax year time

[georgina]

Maryland really works for us retired people. 2 Pension exclusions and no SS tax. Love it!

PA didn't tax SS, pensions, OR IRA withdrawals (we paid state tax on our contributions). I really miss that about living there!

 

[Judique]

PA didn't tax SS, pensions, OR IRA withdrawals (we paid state tax on our contributions). I really miss that about living there!

I would miss it also. These 2 states that we live in are different in many ways!

 

[Judique]

Please tell me more. I am in Maryland and my pension is taxed. DH and I each get to exclude $15k of our pensions due to being retired police officers but the rest is taxed. What am I missing?

removed personal info

 

[Claire&TheBoys]

I used to work for a CPA and did lots of personal returns. I changed jobs about 5 years ago and now I just have to do my own. I do all the accounting for the companies I work for, but happily send the info to the CPA who does the corporate returns. Our personal return isn't a big deal and I generally don't mind doing it. This year, I'm miffed for the second time that the "child tax credit" ends when the child turns 17. It's for children "under 17" and as our younger son turned 17 last year, his dependent tax credit dropped from $2000 to $500. It's ridiculous that a dependent ages out of the tax credit at 17 - most kids are still at home in high school at 17.

I try to make it so we're close to break-even with the feds. Last year we got back a few hundred dollars; this year we're going to owe a few hundred dollars thanks to losing the CTC. We live in a no-personal-income-tax state so we don't have to file a state return.

 

[kdonnel]

I think I got the last needed document today.

I will wait a couple weeks just to be sure before filing.

As expected the numbers are all within 10s of dollars when compared to last year.

 

[tzolkin]

I did taxes for several family members as well and once it got too complicated I told them to get an accountant to do it, not one of the services. That worked out well for them and finally got me off the hook of doing it every year for them.

I got stuck doing family's taxes when I was in college because it was easiest for me to just do mine and my parents taxes and then complete the FAFSA. Then my brother started college, then my sister... so I wound up doing them all plus the FAFSAs. I think I continued for a few years after I graduated and then told them they were really easy enough that they should be able to complete on their own.

This year, I'm miffed for the second time that the "child tax credit" ends when the child turns 17. It's for children "under 17" and as our younger son turned 17 last year, his dependent tax credit dropped from $2000 to $500. It's ridiculous that a dependent ages out of the tax credit at 17 - most kids are still at home in high school at 17.

I agree, I could never understand the under 17 age limit. I think the majority of high school seniors are 17/18 and that tends to be one of the most expensive years, so it's not like they're costing you less than they did at 14 or 15. The only thing I could guess is that perhaps they're assuming that by 17 the kid has a job and is covering some of their own expenses so the parents don't "need" the credit, but that's certainly not the case for everyone with older teens.

 

[gmi3804]

I agree, I could never understand the under 17 age limit. I think the majority of high school seniors are 17/18 and that tends to be one of the most expensive years, so it's not like they're costing you less than they did at 14 or 15. The only thing I could guess is that perhaps they're assuming that by 17 the kid has a job and is covering some of their own expenses so the parents don't "need" the credit, but that's certainly not the case for everyone with older teens.

Well someone has to pay for all the cuts for the wealthy. Why not we, the masses? [/sarcasm]

 

[wide awake]

Did mine using Turbotax last weekend. Easy, W-2s for me, 1099R for DH, and a small amount of interest. Our house is paid off so nothing there, but there wouldn't be anyway due to the high standard deduction. Turbotax timed it at 40 minutes and some of that was time spent typing in W-2 and interest statements. We always get a refund, I contribute the max to my 401K and another nice chunk to a 457b. I know, I know, I'm giving the government a tax free loan. Don't care, like a bigger check once a year.

 

[gmi3804]

Did mine using Turbotax last weekend. Easy, W-2s for me, 1099R for DH, and a small amount of interest. Our house is paid off so nothing there, but there wouldn't be anyway due to the high standard deduction. Turbotax timed it at 40 minutes and some of that was time spent typing in W-2 and interest statements. We always get a refund, I contribute the max to my 401K and another nice chunk to a 457b. I know, I know, I'm giving the government a tax free loan. Don't care, like a bigger check once a year.

Do you like the Disney Dining Plan too?

 

[wide awake]

Do you like the Disney Dining Plan too?

Yep, sure do.

 

[TAX GUY]

Well someone has to pay for all the cuts for the wealthy. Why not we, the masses? [/sarcasm]

Can you share what cuts for the wealthy you're talking about? I usually see that those considered "wealthy" are the ones losing those tax credits due to phase out limits. As it applies to the child tax credit, other dependent credit, education credit(s), retirement contribution credits, as well as many others, the more you make, the less you get regarding those "tax cuts". Unless of course, I'm missing something and you know something no one else knows?

 

[gmi3804]

Can you share what cuts for the wealthy you're talking about? I usually see that those considered "wealthy" are the ones losing those tax credits due to phase out limits. As it applies to the child tax credit, other dependent credit, education credit(s), retirement contribution credits, as well as many others, the more you make, the less you get regarding those "tax cuts". Unless of course, I'm missing something and you know something no one else knows?

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act from 2019 was well-publicized, and was a huge overhaul of the tax code, so it's hardly arcane information. Many individuals saw their tax burdens increase; corporations (perhaps erroneously identified as "the wealthy," sorry for that) were given a 21% flat tax, an enormous victory for them. In addition, many of the tax incentives for individuals will expire in 2025, ostensibly to make up for the difference. The new code is absolutely lopsided. This information is readily available in greater detail if you're truly interested.

 

[TAX GUY]

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act from 2019 was well-publicized, and was a huge overhaul of the tax code, so it's hardly arcane information. Many individuals saw their tax burdens increase; corporations (perhaps erroneously identified as "the wealthy," sorry for that) were given a 21% flat tax, an enormous victory for them. In addition, many of the tax incentives for individuals will expire in 2025, ostensibly to make up for the difference. The new code is absolutely lopsided. This information is readily available in greater detail if you're truly interested.

Ah, my mistake, you were talking about individuals and corporations in the same breath as if they were/are applied the same.

Well, luckily for us poor folks, or non-wealthy, there might be some reprieve with the latest proposals to increase the CTC (refundable part) not only for the current year and future year, but also retroactive for the prior year! Woo-hoo! Free money from the wealthy!!!

 

[gmi3804]

Ah, my mistake, you were talking about individuals and corporations in the same breath as if they were/are applied the same.

Well, luckily for us poor folks, or non-wealthy, there might be some reprieve with the latest proposals to increase the CTC (refundable part) not only for the current year and future year, but also retroactive for the prior year! Woo-hoo! Free money from the wealthy!!!

Yes, sorry, I should've been more clear before.

I suppose that my argument is that they're getting way more breaks than they probably should, putting the burden on all of us peons. What's the famous Warren Buffet quip that his secretary pays more taxes than he does? I know he meant a higher rate; but is that fair? When most of our financial problems could be solved if corporations paid their fair share?

 

[TAX GUY]

Yes, sorry, I should've been more clear before.

I suppose that my argument is that they're getting way more breaks than they probably should, putting the burden on all of us peons. What's the famous Warren Buffet quip that his secretary pays more taxes than he does? I know he meant a higher rate; but is that fair? When most of our financial problems could be solved if corporations paid their fair share?

The Buffet example is apples to oranges. Everyone has the same set of rules to apply. I don't believe I need to explain it to you (you appear to have knowledge about the topic based on your replies), but ordinary income is taxed the same to you, me, politicians and shareholders. Capital gains are also done in the same way, for everyone. Corporations all have to follow the laws applied to them, just as non-profit organizations, partnerships, trusts, estates, etc.

My opinion as to fair share, across the board for all, is each level of taxable (ordinary) income us taxed (federally) at certain percentages, or tax brackets. The higher that taxable income is, the higher the percentage for that range of income. So, a flat rate of 21% for corporations is still MORE than many of lower taxable income levels for individuals. The phase out's I previously mentioned typically hit those that are into the 22% bracket, and is completely gone for those that breech into the higher brackets. 21% is still a lot, even if many think it should be more. Rather than discussing tax payers marginal rates, we should also consider their effective rate as that will be a better comparison (to the corporate flat rate of 21%). I believe they (corporations) are paying a fair share, percentage wise. If it's a certain type/class of entity and their shareholders or officers take a big chunk to reduce those profits, then they are probably paying MORE (at a higher rate) than it would have been at the corporate level.

I believe many of the talks about financial troubles being solved or helped by "fair share", isn't really about a fair share, but more about "more share". A percent is a percent until it comes to the actual amount. When people see record profits, or even any profits, they assume a larger amount should be paid, even though it's (usually) a higher percentage than most others. Something that *should* help our financial problems would be to spend less, or spend smarter. It still boggles my mine that they (government) set their spending first, then go get the funds, while the rest of us (all of us) get our funds first, then set the spending.

 

[gmi3804]

I believe many of the talks about financial troubles being solved or helped by "fair share", isn't really about a fair share, but more about "more share". A percent is a percent until it comes to the actual amount. When people see record profits, or even any profits, they assume a larger amount should be paid, even though it's (usually) a higher percentage than most others. Something that *should* help our financial problems would be to spend less, or spend smarter. It still boggles my mine that they (government) set their spending first, then go get the funds, while the rest of us (all of us) get our funds first, then set the spending.

If you want to call it "more share," that's OK with me. Especially when some of these corporations' business models rely so heavily on labor that's subsidized by public programs because the laborers can't earn a living wage working a full-time job at these places. We're "paying" for that too. A lot.

 

[wvjules]

Heigh Ho, Heigh Ho, it's more taxes I owe.

I have to pay both federal and state again this year.