Ask Liz Weston

Get smart with your money

Taxes

Q&A: When to report an unresponsive accountant

By Leave a Comment

Dear Liz: In a previous column, you answered a question from someone dealing with an unexpected bank levy by a state tax agency. The accountant who prepared the tax returns wasn’t responding to emails or calls. If an accountant ignores a client, then a complaint should be filed with the state’s board of accounting. If the accountant is licensed, the state board will likely follow up.

Answer: That’s a good suggestion. As mentioned in the previous column, many tax pros struggle to keep up with client communications during the busy tax season and may back-burner questions they don’t see as urgent. But if the ignored client still hasn’t heard back from their tax pro at this point, making a complaint to the board of accounting could be a reasonable response.

Q&A: Living in your rental? The tax benefits aren’t so clear cut

By Leave a Comment

Dear Liz: My husband and I have owned a rental property for 20 years. We’ve never lived in it. Now, we want to get out of the landlord business. We know we’ll have to recapture depreciation, but we always thought we could live in the property for a couple of years to save some on the capital gains taxes. Our accountant has told us that this is no longer true and we cannot save much by living in our rental. Federal and state taxes will take most of our profit. Is this true?

Answer: Congress dramatically shrank the loophole that once allowed people to reduce or eliminate capital gains on rental and vacation properties.

When selling a primary residence, homeowners can shelter up to $250,000 of home sale proceeds, or $500,000 for married couples, from capital gains tax if they’ve owned and lived in the home at least two of the previous five years. Those rules were established in the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997.

Before the Housing Assistance Tax Act of 2008, landlords could move into their rentals for a couple of years, sell the properties and then invoke the home sale exclusion as if the property had been their primary residence all along.

Today most if not all of the gain on your property is considered “non-qualified use.” Only the appreciation you experienced before 2009, and after you move in, would qualify for the exemption.

The benefits of moving into a rental for a couple of years can vary greatly, depending on the specifics of your situation. Your tax pro can walk you through the math and advise you about some of your other tax-saving options, such as a 1031 exchange for another rental property or holding the real estate until death, when your heirs would benefit from a valuable step-up in basis. If you’re done with being a landlord, though, the cleanest solution might be to simply sell and pay the tax.

Q&A: Timing matters with estimated tax payments

By Leave a Comment

Dear Liz: Your recent column about how to distribute estimated tax payments over the year (equal versus backend loaded) may have missed an important nuance. Your answer regarding the Form 2220 safe harbor is correct and would apply if the taxpayer’s income were retirement fund distributions. As I read the query, however, it’s possible (perhaps likely?) that the year-end distributions are from a taxable brokerage account. In that case, even absent intra-year distributions to the taxpayer, the dividends appearing in the account are deemed constructively received when paid by the portfolio companies into the brokerage account.

I can understand how an IRS agent would simply argue for equal payments. And I similarly understand that a competent accountant would know the safe harbor rules. It’s impossible to know which of them is correct here from the letter as printed.

Answer: My answer relied on guidance from Mark Luscombe, principal analyst for Wolters Kluwer Tax & Accounting, and he says that you have a point.

The original writer stated that they received the majority of their income at the end of the year, and most of it was dividends from their brokerage account. The writer had been told by an IRS agent that estimated tax payments were due throughout the year, while the writer’s accountant contended that wasn’t necessary. The writer didn’t specify whether it was a taxable or retirement account or when the dividends were actually paid into the account.

Luscombe assumed that the dividends were received at the end of the year, but the writer could have meant that dividends were only withdrawn then.

If the account is a qualified retirement brokerage account, it wouldn’t matter when the dividends were paid, only when the withdrawal was made, Luscombe notes. If it’s a taxable account receiving dividends throughout the year, then the IRS agent would be correct that the dividends would be taxable based on when they were received into the account.

Q&A: Should I consider Roth conversions now or after I retire?

By 1 Comment

Dear Liz: My husband and I both waited until age 70 to start Social Security. I will be 72 in September and am considering retirement. My husband is retired, 74, and taking required minimum distributions (RMDs). We have always tried to maximize contributions to our pre-tax retirement accounts and are now realizing the downside as we pay taxes on those mandatory withdrawals. Should I consider Roth conversions now or after I retire? I realize I will need to pay taxes on those conversions, but would it be best to do that when my income is lower? I am thinking about my kids and their future.

Answer: Late-in-life Roth conversions can be tricky. The amount you convert is removed from RMD calculations, lowering future tax bills. But the conversion is added to your current taxable income, potentially making more of your Social Security taxable and temporarily raising your Medicare premiums (thanks to income-related monthly adjustment amounts or IRMAA) in addition to generating a big tax bill.

Theoretically, a conversion could still make sense if your current tax rate is lower than the one you’ll have once you start required minimum distributions at 73. The case for conversion is strengthened if you want to pass this money to your kids. They likely would have to empty any inherited retirement account within 10 years, and they could be in their peak earning (and tax-paying) years when they do so. By converting now, you would in effect be paying the tax bill for them, perhaps at a lower rate than they might face, and allowing them to inherit the money tax-free.

A tax pro can help you with the calculations so you’ll understand the financial impact of a conversion. Then you can make an informed decision about whether to proceed.

Q&A: How are IRA withdrawals taxed?

By

Dear Liz: I’m aware that assets held in tax-advantaged accounts, such as an IRA or 401(k), avoid capital gains taxes on the sale of an asset. However, will those capital gains taxes have to be paid later when it is time to withdraw money from those accounts? If yes, can I offset it with any capital losses?

Answer: Traditional retirement accounts such as IRAs or 401(k)s change how investment gains are taxed. You don’t pay tax when investments within the accounts are sold, but withdrawals from the account are typically taxed as ordinary income, not as capital gains. So you won’t have an opportunity to directly offset capital gains with losses as you would with nonretirement accounts.

However, if your losses exceed your gains in your nonretirement accounts, you can use up to $3,000 of capital losses to offset ordinary income each year. Any remaining losses can be carried forward to the next year where it’s rinse and repeat: capital losses offset capital gains, with up to $3,000 of any remaining loss used to offset ordinary income. This goes on until the losses are finally used up.