ReportWire

Tag: taxes

  • 5 tax tips for older adults

    5 tax tips for older adults

    [ad_1]

    More than half of older taxpayers (57%) are worried they’ll have to pay more taxes this year because of the 5.9% Social Security cost-of-living adjustment in 2022, according to a January survey by The Senior Citizens League, a nonpartisan seniors group.

    Taxes for the over-65 set can feel more complicated for a variety of reasons: There are often multiple streams of income, some retirees still work part time, and people may be managing required minimum distributions from retirement accounts.

    “It can happen that people have more income in their later life than they did when they were working,” says Barbara O’Neill, a certified financial planner in Ocala, Florida, and the author of “Flipping a Switch : Your Guide to Happiness and Financial Security in Later Life.”

    For older adults, here are some items to keep in mind this tax season:

    1. MEDICARE THRESHOLDS MATTER

    Your income can affect your Medicare Part B and Part D premiums in the future because of the income-related monthly adjustment amount, or IRMAA. Medicare premiums are based on your tax return from two years prior, and you may have to pay more if your income exceeds certain thresholds.

    These IRMAA surcharges can be difficult to manage “because they operate as a cliff, not a phase-in,” says Edward Jastrem, a certified financial planner in Westwood, Massachusetts. “For example, if you are $1 over an income tier, you are subject to the full surcharge.”

    In 2023, people filing individually with a modified adjusted gross income of more than $97,000 in 2021 — or jointly with more than $194,000 — will pay higher monthly amounts for Medicare. “Tax bracket management becomes crucial in later life,” O’Neill says.

    2. REQUIRED DISTRIBUTIONS CAN GO TO CHARITY

    At age 73, you are required by the IRS to start taking required minimum distributions from tax-deferred retirement accounts. But once you hit age 70 1/2, you can have some or all of your required minimum distributions sent directly to a charity of your choice. This move will still count as a required minimum distribution, but the amount isn’t added to your taxable income.

    “If you take a regular RMD from your IRA, it gets added to your adjusted gross income for tax purposes,” says Ian Weinberg, a certified financial planner in Woodbury, New York. “It usually throws you into a higher bracket.”

    Sending money directly to charity is called a qualified charitable distribution, and you can do this with up to $100,000 of your annual required minimum distributions.

    3. SIDE BUSINESSES CHANGE THE TAX APPROACH

    About 1 in 4 adults 50 and older say they’re doing gig work or freelancing, according to a January survey from AARP.

    If you’re doing gig work, that counts as business income — which means you can deduct business expenses. This includes health insurance premiums if you’re paying for your own insurance. “Self-employed older adults on Medicare can deduct Medicare premiums for themselves and their spouses against business income,” O’Neill says.

    Other deductible expenses may include business supplies, home office costs and advertising expenses, which may include costs to run a website.

    4. SOCIAL SECURITY MAY BE TAXABLE

    Many people don’t realize that Social Security benefits are taxable if your income meets certain thresholds. “That takes people by surprise,” says Nadine Burns, a certified financial planner in Ann Arbor, Michigan.

    The taxable portion of your Social Security benefits is based on your combined income, which is the total of your adjusted gross income, nontaxable interest and half of your Social Security benefits. If you’re filing taxes as an individual and your combined income is over $25,000 — or over $32,000 if you’re filing a joint return — you may pay income tax on up to 50% to 85% of your benefits.

    5. STATE TAX BREAKS MAY BE AVAILABLE

    Your state may offer tax deductions or credits for retirees, so do some research. In South Carolina, for instance, all military retirement pay and Social Security income is exempt from state taxes, says Stephen Maggard, a certified financial planner in Columbia, South Carolina. Plus, he says, there’s a separate deduction for those over age 65.

    In Ohio, retirees may be eligible for credits based on retirement income or their age — there’s a senior citizen credit for taxpayers who were 65 or older during the tax year. Colorado offers an income tax credit of up to $1,000 to residents 65 and up if they meet income requirements. Check with your state tax department to see what’s possible.

    ________________________________________

    This article was provided to The Associated Press by the personal finance website NerdWallet. The content is for educational and informational purposes and does not constitute investment advice. Kate Ashford is a writer at NerdWallet. Email: kashford@nerdwallet.com. Twitter: @kateashford.

    RELATED LINKS:

    NerdWallet: What is the Medicare IRMAA, and when does it apply? https://bit.ly/nerdwallet-what-is-the-medicare-irmaa

    IRS: State Government Websites https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/state-government-websites

    METHODOLOGY:

    The survey by The Senior Citizens League was conducted in early fall of 2022 and had 1,429 participants, 97% of whom said they were collecting Social Security benefits.

    The Senior Citizens League. (January, 2023.) “Press Brief, Inflation — COLA Update.” https://seniorsleague.org/assets/Press-Briefing-01.12.2023.pdf

    The survey from AARP sampled 2,000 respondents ages 40-plus in the labor force, including oversamples of 1,079 Black workers, 1,103 Hispanic workers, 693 Asian American/Pacific Islander workers and 644 LGBTQ workers. The data was weighted to be nationally representative. The survey was fielded online from Sept. 15 to Oct. 12, 2022, in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

    AARP. (January, 2023.) “Gig Work on the Rise Among Older Adults as Demand for Workplace Flexibility Grows.” https://press.aarp.org/2023-01-18-Gig-Work-on-the-Rise-Among-Older-Adults-as-Demand-for-Workplace-Flexibility-Grows

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • IRS extends tax deadline in storm-impacted areas in several states

    IRS extends tax deadline in storm-impacted areas in several states

    [ad_1]

    The IRS has pushed tax deadlines back for taxpayers in several states across the country because of storm damage from the East Coast to the West Coast. 

    Tuesday, April 18, 2023, is the tax filing deadline for most Americans, but the deadline was extended on Monday for Arkansas storm victims. They now have until July 31 to file various federal individual and business tax returns and make tax payments.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency designated parts of the state as a disaster area after tornadoes and storms tore through the region on Friday. The tax extension applies to individuals and households that live or have a business in Cross, Lonoke and Pulaski counties, the IRS said. The tax expansion will expand if other counties are added to the disaster area.

    The IRS previously pushed back tax deadlines for Mississippi, California, Alabama, Georgia and New York. 

    The deadline for Mississippi taxpayers impacted by storms was also extended to July 31, officials said on Wednesday. Tornadoes and severe storms impacted the state on March 24 and 25. Taxpayers in Carroll, Humphreys, Monroe, Montgomery, Panola and Sharkey counties will be eligible for tax filing and payment extensions. 

    In New York’s Erie, Genesee, Niagara, St. Lawrence and Suffolk counties, victims of the severe winter storm in late December 2022 have until May 15 to file taxes, the IRS said. 

    Flooding, winter storms, landslides and mudslides in California also prompted IRS extensions. The deadline for filing has been extended in more than three dozen counties. 

    The tax extension applies to individuals and households that live or have a business in Alpine, Amador, Butte, Calaveras, Del Norte, El Dorado, Fresno, Glenn, Humboldt, Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Kings, Lake, Los Angeles, Madera, Mariposa, Mendocino, Merced, Mono, Monterey, Napa, Nevada, Orange, Placer, Plumas, Sacramento, San Benito, San Bernardino, San Francisco, San Joaquin, San Mateo, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Sierra, Sonoma, Stanislaus, Trinity, Tulare, Tuolumne and Yuba counties.

    In January, the tax deadline for storm victims in parts of Georgia and Alabama was pushed until May 15. That deadline was then pushed back even further to Oct. 16. The change applies in Butts, Henry, Jasper, Meriwether, Newton, Spalding and Troup counties in Georgia and Autauga and Dallas counties in Alabama.

    The full list of those eligible for Tax Relief in Disaster Situations is available on the IRS website. 

    Taxpayers who do not live in storm-impacted areas can also file for extensions by filling out Form 4868. The IRS notes that an extension of time to file does not grant any extension of time to pay your taxes. 

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Liz Weston: Will you face a tax bomb in retirement?

    Liz Weston: Will you face a tax bomb in retirement?

    [ad_1]

    Good savers, beware. The money you’re stuffing into your 401(k) and other retirement accounts has to be withdrawn someday. If you’re not strategic about how you save, you could face unnecessarily high tax bills and inflated Medicare premiums in retirement — plus, you could be saddling your heirs with higher taxes.

    The earlier you start defusing this potential tax bomb, the better. But even people in their 60s or early 70s may have opportunities to lessen the potential damage — as long as they act swiftly.

    “You do not want to be in the position as some clients are that all of their funds are inside of a tax-deferred account,” says Pam Ladd, senior manager of personal financial planning at the Association of International Certified Professional Accountants.

    TAX BREAKS NOW COULD CAUSE TAX PAIN LATER

    Most retirement accounts offer a tax break when you put money in. Eventually, though, Uncle Sam wants to get paid. Required minimum distributions, or RMDs, typically must start at a certain age — currently 73 and rising to 75 for people born in 1960 and later. Retirement fund withdrawals usually are subject to regular income tax rates.

    That’s still a good deal for most retirees because their tax bracket will be lower in retirement than when they were working. But people who don’t need to spend down their savings early in retirement may find that required minimum distributions push them into higher tax brackets.

    “People are working longer, saving longer and accruing more within their retirement account, and as a result, their RMDs in many cases can be more than they earned while they were still working,” says Colleen Carcone, director of wealth planning strategies at financial services firm TIAA.

    Delaying the start of required minimum distributions can make matters worse because you’re required to take out larger percentages of your balances as you age, Carcone says. Meanwhile, your accounts have more time to grow.

    SAVERS COULD PAY MORE FOR MEDICARE — AND COST THEIR KIDS

    Higher incomes can mean higher Medicare premiums as well, thanks to the income-related monthly adjustment amount, or IRMAA , which is based on your income from two years ago.

    Most people will pay $164.90 per month this year for Medicare Part B , which pays for doctor visits. But Medicare recipients whose 2021 modified adjusted gross income exceeded $97,000 (for single filers) or $194,000 (for married couples) pay $230.80 to $560.50 monthly, depending on their income. The IRMAA surcharge for Medicare Part D coverage, which pays for prescriptions, can add $12.20 to $76.40 per month, depending on income. A couple with a $250,000 income in 2021 could end up paying surcharges totaling $4,711.20 for their Medicare coverage in 2023.

    The tax toll may not stop there. If you leave retirement money to your kids or anyone other than your spouse, they’re typically required to empty the accounts by the end of the 10th year following the year of your death . Required minimum distributions from inherited retirement accounts could push your heirs into higher tax brackets or cause other financial complications.

    HOW TO DEFUSE THE TAX BOMB

    Predicting who will face a future tax bomb can be tough, particularly if you’re decades away from retirement. But most people would be smart to have at least some money in accounts that aren’t subject to taxes or required minimum distributions — such as Roth IRAs , Roth 401(k) plans and Roth 403(b) plans — to better control their tax bills in retirement, Ladd says.

    With Roths, contributions aren’t deductible, but withdrawals in retirement are tax-free. You aren’t required to tap a Roth IRA during your lifetime, and legislation passed at the end of last year removes required minimum distributions from workplace Roths starting in 2024. Non-spouse heirs are required to drain the account within 10 years, just as with regular retirement plans , but the withdrawals aren’t taxable.

    The ability to contribute to a Roth IRA phases out at modified adjusted gross incomes from $138,000 to $153,000 for singles and from $218,000 to $228,000 for married couples. But many 401(k) plans and 403(b) plans now offer Roth options, and these workplace plans don’t have income limits, Carcone notes. Another option is to convert existing pretax retirement money into a Roth account, which typically requires paying income taxes on the conversion.

    Paying taxes now versus later can make sense when you’re young and expect to be in a higher tax bracket in retirement, tax pros say. But some older people may find a conversion can help lessen the tax impact of future required minimum distributions, Carcone says. Late-in-life conversions should be handled carefully because like required minimum distributions, they can end up inflating your tax bracket and Medicare premiums, she says.

    Given the financial stakes, Carcone recommends consulting a tax pro or financial planner who can provide individualized advice.

    “It’s never too early to start working with a financial adviser and start getting that roadmap planned out,” Carcone says.

    _____________________________________ This column was provided to The Associated Press by the personal finance site NerdWallet. The content is for educational and informational purposes and does not constitute investment advice. Liz Weston is a columnist at NerdWallet, a certified financial planner and the author of “Your Credit Score.” Email: lweston@nerdwallet.com. Twitter: @lizweston.

    RELATED LINK:

    NerdWallet: How to spot a great 401(k)

    https://bit.ly/nerdwallet-how-to-spot-a-great-401k

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Free Webinar | April 6: When to Use an LLC, S-Corp, or C-Corp? | Entrepreneur

    Free Webinar | April 6: When to Use an LLC, S-Corp, or C-Corp? | Entrepreneur

    [ad_1]

    Making your business official through incorporation can help attract investors, save you money during tax time and protect your personal assets from debts and liabilities. Incorporation can come in the form of an LLC, S-Corp or C-Corp. So which is right for you?

    Mark J. Kohler, CPA, attorney, and author of The Tax and Legal Playbook, and Mat Sorensen, attorney, CEO of Directed IRA & Directed Trust Company, and author of The Self-Directed IRA Handbook, will be breaking down all of the options and help you determine which entity is right for your business.

    Topics to be covered:

    • Pros and cons of an LLC

    • How an S-Corp saves taxes

    • Understanding asset protection of your entity

    • Why the C-Corp isn’t the right fit for most businesses

    • What state you should set-up your entity in

    • Avoiding bad advice and scams for your entity

    Don’t miss out! Register now join us on April 6th at 3:00 PM ET.

    About the Speakers:

    Entrepreneur Press author Mark J. Kohler, CPA, attorney, co-host of the Podcast “Main Street Business”, and a senior partner at both the law firm KKOS Lawyers and the accounting firm K&E CPAs. Kohler is also the author of “The Tax and Legal Playbook, 2nd Edition”, and “The Business Owner’s Guide to Financial Freedom”.

    Mat Sorensen is an attorney, CEO, author, and podcast host. He is the CEO of Directed IRA & Directed Trust Company, a leading company in the self-directed IRA and 401k industry and a partner in the business and tax law firm of KKOS Lawyers. He is the author of “The Self-Directed IRA Handbook”.

    [ad_2]

    Entrepreneur Staff

    Source link

  • EV tax credit likely to get updated with proposed battery source requirements

    EV tax credit likely to get updated with proposed battery source requirements

    [ad_1]

    The electric vehicle tax credit just got a little bit more complicated with the announcement of a highly anticipated proposal which would apply to the battery components of eligible EVs.

    Under the proposed rule, EV manufacturers must certify each eligible vehicle meets key battery sourcing and manufacturing requirements which were laid out in the text of the Inflation Reduction Act. Those requirements apply to a $7,500 tax credit. 

    President Biden signed the act into law in August of 2022, but the Treasury Department delayed the battery requirement portion of the tax credit ahead of 2023.

    Under the proposed guidance, batteries for EVs must meet a “critical mineral requirement” to be eligible for $3,750 of the tax credit. For those applying for the tax credit on a vehicle purchased in 2023, 40% of the minerals contained in the vehicle’s battery must have been extracted or processed in the U.S. or in a nation that has a free trade agreement with the U.S. That percentage requirement gradually increases to 80% in 2027.

    A second “battery component requirement” is also proposed for the other $3,750 portion of the tax credit. It requires that a percentage of the EV battery’s components be manufactured or assembled within North America. For 2023, 50% of the battery’s components must meet that requirement. That percentage also increases every year, until it reaches the 100% threshold in 2029.  

    During a phone briefing with reporters, Biden administration officials explained the reasoning behind the new rules, which are aimed at moving EV battery supply chains away from China.  

    “We know that in order to meet our energy security, climate and economic goals, we need to build a clean energy supply chain that is not dependent on China,” said a senior administration official. “Given China’s currently dominant position in the clean energy supply chain we need to work with our allies and partners to build a resilient alternative supply chain that can meet the demand among American consumers.”

    Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen signaled the move could create jobs for the American economy.

    “The Inflation Reduction Act is a once-in-a-generation piece of legislation that is lowering costs for American consumers, building a strong U.S. industrial base, and bolstering supply chains,” Yellen said in a statement Friday. “Today, Treasury is taking an important step that will help consumers save up to $7,500 on a new clean vehicle and hundreds of dollars per year on gas, while creating American manufacturing jobs and strengthening our energy and national security.”

    One major drawback for the new rule is that several vehicles which currently qualify for the credit will no longer be eligible for the full $7,500 tax break. Last week, according to a report in Electrek, Tesla acknowledged that it would lose the full tax credit on a variant of the Model 3, since the battery is sourced from China. At least three versions of Tesla’s Model 3 and Model Y qualify for the credit.

    Officials acknowledged that fewer vehicles would be eligible for the tax credit, but expressed that, over time, more cars would qualify as manufacturing and sourcing of battery components moves to the U.S. or its trade partners. Some car companies, like General Motors, expressed a hint of optimism ahead of the rule’s implementation.

    “We believe GM is well-positioned because we were already actively pursuing opportunities to localize as much of the supply chain as possible,” a GM spokesperson told CBS News.

    The Treasury Department is expected to work with vehicle manufacturers in the coming days ahead of the April 18 deadline for the publication of the rule. Vehicles must still meet an MSRP limit of $55,000 for cars and $80,000 for SUVs. To qualify, buyers cannot have an income of more than $150,000 per year for individuals, $225,000 for heads of households, and $300,000 for couples. 

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Is your state tax-friendly? Here are the most and least taxed in the country

    Is your state tax-friendly? Here are the most and least taxed in the country

    [ad_1]

    Last minute tips for taxpayers


    Last minute tips for taxpayers

    04:08

    Taxpayers in some states are carrying a far heavier burden than others, according to a new report

    The data, from personal finance website WalletHub, shows that while Americans on average pay $11,000 in federal taxes each year, the amount they pay in overall taxes can vary widely based on where they live. Residents of states with the highest taxes forked over double their share of annual income as those in the lowest taxed ones, due to disparities in state and local rates, the report shows. 

    Researchers calculated residents’ tax burden, or the percentage of income consumed by state and local taxes, by adding up three types of tax types: property taxes, individual income taxes, and sales and excise taxes. They computed the three types of taxes for each state using median U.S. household income, home and car values, and household spending data. 


    Biden’s budget plan calls for increasing taxes on the wealthy

    04:58

    To keep more of your paycheck out of Uncle Sam’s pockets, head to Alaska, where the overall tax burden is 5.06%, according to the report. Those who are yearning to live in New York will have to pay for the privilege — 12.47% of your income, to be exact. 

    Here are the U.S. states with the highest and lowest tax burdens as ranked by WalletHub: 

    States with the highest tax burdens:

    • New York (12.47%)
    • Hawaii (12.31%)
    • Maine (11.14%)
    • Vermont (10.28%)
    • Connecticut (9.83%)
    • New Jersey (9.76%)
    • Maryland (9.44%)
    • Minnesota (9.41%)
    • Illinois (9.38%)
    • Iowa (9.15%)

    States with the lowest tax burdens:

    • Alaska (5.06%)
    • Delaware (6.12%)
    • New Hampshire (6.14%)
    • Tennessee (6.22%)
    • Florida (6.33%)
    • Wyoming (6.42%)
    • South Dakota (6.69%)
    • Montana (6.93%)
    • Missouri (7.11%)
    • Oklahoma (7.12%)


    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How to Identify a Good Investment (Even During Economic Uncertainty) | Entrepreneur

    How to Identify a Good Investment (Even During Economic Uncertainty) | Entrepreneur

    [ad_1]

    Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

    Rising inflation. Ongoing supply chain problems. International conflict.

    There’s a lot of volatility in the market today, which has many entrepreneurs and investors feeling stressed. With this much uncertainty, choosing how to allocate money and being confident in those choices can be challenging. Too often, people get trapped in analysis paralysis or needlessly lose sleep second-guessing themselves.

    One of the best ways to ease that stress is to take the emotion out of your decision-making. And the best way to take emotion out of the equation is to establish a clear set of investing criteria. By knowing precisely what a good investment looks like, you’ll be able to make wise decisions quickly, efficiently and confidently, no matter what else is happening in the world.

    Related: Why the Current Volatile Market is an Opportune Time for Impact Investing in Undercapitalized Entrepreneurs

    Step 1: Understand who you are and what you want

    Investing is not a one-size-fits-all process. An excellent opportunity for you may not be great for someone who doesn’t share your interests, risk profile and goals. This means establishing your investing criteria begins with introspection.

    Spend time answering the following questions:

    • What kind of lifestyle do you want your investments to fund? The answer to this question will help you begin to create accurate financial targets.
    • Are there certain types of assets you enjoy more than others? Some people love buying and managing real estate, while others prefer commodities or currency. Some people are deeply involved in a single business, while others enjoy the thrill of serial entrepreneurship.
    • How do you feel about using leverage? The extent to which you’re willing to use borrowed capital as a source of funding will impact the types of investments that make it onto your preferred list. Strategically using leverage can dramatically increase your opportunities to generate returns, but this technique isn’t a good fit for everyone.

    Step 2: Use the tax law to your advantage

    I always tell my clients: The tax law is a series of incentives. It is the government’s way of telling you what it wants you to do, and when you listen, the government is willing to invest with you. So, while there are a lot of investments that will increase your taxes as you earn more money, there are some excellent options that the government is so excited to have you make it is willing to reduce or even eliminate your taxes.

    How does this work? Governments around the world recognize their societies are better off when businesses and private citizens invest in things like creating jobs, building housing and growing food. So, they create tax incentives to promote these investments.

    I recently wrapped up an in-depth study of these incentives in the U.S. and 14 other countries and identified seven categories of investments that every government supports. The categories are:

    • Business
    • Technology, research and development
    • Real estate
    • Energy
    • Agriculture
    • Insurance
    • Retirement savings

    Which of these categories matches the criteria you established in step 1? Spend time learning more about what incentives the government offers to investors in the categories that interest you most. When you use these incentives, you’re putting yourself in a position to build wealth faster by decreasing the amount of money you’re paying in taxes.

    Choose the category that fits you best. Then, double down on your research. Ideally, you will become narrowly focused on a specific niche within your chosen category. The more you learn about a specific investment and the more focused you become, the more you will increase your expertise. The greater your expertise, the lower your risk.

    Related: 7 Best Types Of Investments In 2023

    Step 3: Make a checklist

    Now that you have clarified what you’re looking for in an investment and identified the tax-effective categories in which you’ll invest, you can finalize the specific criteria you’ll use for evaluating each option. Your goal is to create a detailed checklist that lets you quickly and confidently determine which investments suit you best. Once you have established this framework within your investing niche, you’ll be able to scale your investment process.

    Your list should include the prospective investments:

    • Target rate of return
    • Expected cash flow
    • Leverage requirements
    • Exit strategy
    • And, of course, tax repercussions

    Creating this framework isn’t a black-and-white task. Your goals, circumstances and values will determine what makes an investment a good fit for you.

    You absolutely can and should do this work with the support of your CPA and other financial advisors. They can help you navigate the technical requirements on the tax side and make more precise financial estimates. Having the right team in place, alongside a proven wealth and tax strategy, serves as extra protection from making poor choices in high-stress situations.

    At the end of the day, you’ll have the peace of mind that comes from knowing you are making investment decisions based on where you are in life, where you want to go and how you’d like to get there. Plus, when you build your investing strategy in connection with your tax strategy, you’ll be able to make more money, more quickly and pay fewer taxes at the same time.

    [ad_2]

    Tom Wheelwright

    Source link

  • California lawmakers OK potential fines for high gas prices

    California lawmakers OK potential fines for high gas prices

    [ad_1]

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California lawmakers on Monday approved the nation’s first penalty for price gouging at the pump, voting to give regulators the power to punish oil companies for profiting from the type of gas price spikes that plagued the nation’s most populous state last summer.

    The Democrats in charge of the state Legislature worked quickly to pass the bill on Monday, just one week after it was introduced. It was an unusually fast process for a controversial issue, especially one opposed by the powerful oil industry that has spent millions of dollars to stop it.

    Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom used his political muscle to pass the bill, which grew out of his call last October for a special legislative session to pass a new tax on oil company profits after the average price of gas in California hit a record high of $6.44 per gallon, according to AAA. Taking on the oil industry has been a major policy priority for Newsom, who is widely viewed as a future presidential candidate.

    “When you take on big oil, they usually roll you — that’s exactly what they’ve been doing to consumers for years and years and years,” Newsom told reporters after the vote. “The Legislature had the courage, conviction and the backbone to stand up to big oil.”

    He is expected to sign the bill into law Tuesday.

    Legislative leaders rejected his initial call for a new tax because they feared it could discourage supply and lead to higher prices.

    Instead, Newsom and lawmakers agreed to let the California Energy Commission decide whether to penalize oil companies for price gouging. But the crux of the bill isn’t a potential penalty. Instead, it’s the reams of new information oil companies would be required to disclose to state regulators about their pricing.

    The companies would report this information, most of it to be kept confidential, to a new state agency empowered to monitor and investigate the petroleum market and subpoena oil company executives. The commission will rely on the work of this agency, plus a panel of experts, to decide whether to impose a penalty on oil company profits and how much that penalty should be.

    “If we force folks to turn over this information, I actually don’t believe we’ll ever need a penalty because the fact that they have to tell us what’s going on will stop them from gouging our consumers,” said Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan, a Democrat from Orinda.

    California’s gas prices are always higher than the rest of the country because of the state’s taxes and regulations. California has the second-highest gas tax in the country at 54 cents per gallon. And it requires a special blend of gasoline that is better for the environment but more expensive to produce.

    But state regulators say those taxes and fees aren’t enough to explain last summer, when the average cost of a gallon of gasoline in California was more than $2.60 higher than the national average.

    “There’s truly no other explanation for these historically high prices other than greed,” said Assemblymember Pilar Schiavo, a Democrat from Chatsworth. “The problem is we don’t have the information that we need to prove this, and we don’t have the ability to penalize the kind of historic price gouging we saw last year.”

    The oil industry recorded massive profits last year, following years of huge losses during the pandemic when more people stayed home and fewer people were on the road.

    Eloy Garcia, lobbyist for the Western States Petroleum Association, said California’s high gas prices are the result of decades of public policy decisions that have made the state an island in the global petroleum market and driven many oil refiners out of the state. He noted California does not have a pipeline to send oil into the state, meaning it has to ship what it can’t produce itself from the ocean, which takes longer and costs more.

    “We’re not like Texas. We’re not like Louisiana. We’re not like the Northeast,” Garcia said. “We do not have a fungible fuel supply. We have chosen to do that. We have set ourself up by 30 years of public policy.”

    Garcia said Monday’s vote “sends a clear signal not to invest in California.”

    Lauren Sanchez, senior climate advisor for Gov. Gavin Newsom, said the state has plenty of supply, noting California oil refineries exported 12% of their product to other states last year.

    “We’re also the third-largest gasoline market in the world for these companies,” she said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • California lawmakers OK potential fines for high gas prices

    California lawmakers OK potential fines for high gas prices

    [ad_1]

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California lawmakers on Monday approved the nation’s first penalty for price gouging at the pump, voting to give regulators the power to punish oil companies for profiting from the type of gas price spikes that plagued the nation’s most populous state last summer.

    The Democrats in charge of the state Legislature worked quickly to pass the bill on Monday, just one week after it was introduced. It was an unusually fast process for a controversial issue, especially one opposed by the powerful oil industry that has spent millions of dollars to stop it.

    Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom used his political muscle to pass the bill, which grew out of his call last October for a special legislative session to pass a new tax on oil company profits after the average price of gas in California hit a record high of $6.44 per gallon, according to AAA. Taking on the oil industry has been a major policy priority for Newsom, who is widely viewed as a future presidential candidate.

    “When you take on big oil, they usually roll you — that’s exactly what they’ve been doing to consumers for years and years and years,” Newsom told reporters after the vote. “The Legislature had the courage, conviction and the backbone to stand up to big oil.”

    He is expected to sign the bill into law Tuesday.

    Legislative leaders rejected his initial call for a new tax because they feared it could discourage supply and lead to higher prices.

    Instead, Newsom and lawmakers agreed to let the California Energy Commission decide whether to penalize oil companies for price gouging. But the crux of the bill isn’t a potential penalty. Instead, it’s the reams of new information oil companies would be required to disclose to state regulators about their pricing.

    The companies would report this information, most of it to be kept confidential, to a new state agency empowered to monitor and investigate the petroleum market and subpoena oil company executives. The commission will rely on the work of this agency, plus a panel of experts, to decide whether to impose a penalty on oil company profits and how much that penalty should be.

    “If we force folks to turn over this information, I actually don’t believe we’ll ever need a penalty because the fact that they have to tell us what’s going on will stop them from gouging our consumers,” said Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan, a Democrat from Orinda.

    California’s gas prices are always higher than the rest of the country because of the state’s taxes and regulations. California has the second-highest gas tax in the country at 54 cents per gallon. And it requires a special blend of gasoline that is better for the environment but more expensive to produce.

    But state regulators say those taxes and fees aren’t enough to explain last summer, when the average cost of a gallon of gasoline in California was more than $2.60 higher than the national average.

    “There’s truly no other explanation for these historically high prices other than greed,” said Assemblymember Pilar Schiavo, a Democrat from Chatsworth. “The problem is we don’t have the information that we need to prove this, and we don’t have the ability to penalize the kind of historic price gouging we saw last year.”

    The oil industry recorded massive profits last year, following years of huge losses during the pandemic when more people stayed home and fewer people were on the road.

    Eloy Garcia, lobbyist for the Western States Petroleum Association, said California’s high gas prices are the result of decades of public policy decisions that have made the state an island in the global petroleum market and driven many oil refiners out of the state. He noted California does not have a pipeline to send oil into the state, meaning it has to ship what it can’t produce itself from the ocean, which takes longer and costs more.

    “We’re not like Texas. We’re not like Louisiana. We’re not like the Northeast,” Garcia said. “We do not have a fungible fuel supply. We have chosen to do that. We have set ourself up by 30 years of public policy.”

    Garcia said Monday’s vote “sends a clear signal not to invest in California.”

    Lauren Sanchez, senior climate advisor for Gov. Gavin Newsom, said the state has plenty of supply, noting California oil refineries exported 12% of their product to other states last year.

    “We’re also the third-largest gasoline market in the world for these companies,” she said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • California lawmakers approve nation’s first penalty for gas price gouging

    California lawmakers approve nation’s first penalty for gas price gouging

    [ad_1]

    California lawmakers on Monday approved the nation’s first penalty for gas price gouging, voting to give regulators the power to punish oil companies for profiting from the type of price spikes that hit Californians last summer.

    The Democrats in charge of the state Legislature worked quickly to pass the bill on Monday, just one week after it was introduced. It was an unusually fast process for a controversial issue, especially one opposed by the powerful oil industry, which has spent millions of dollars to stop it.

    Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom used his political muscle to pass the bill, calling for a special legislative session last December to pass a new tax on oil company profits after the average price of gas in California hit a record high of $6.44 per gallon, according to AAA. Taking on the oil industry has been a major policy priority for Newsom, who is viewed as a potential future presidential candidate.

    He is expected to sign the bill into law this week.

    Legislative leaders rejected his initial call for a new tax because they feared it could discourage supply and lead to higher prices.

    Instead, Newsom and lawmakers agreed to let the California Energy Commission decide whether to penalize oil companies for price gouging. But the crux of the bill isn’t a potential penalty — it’s the reams of new information oil companies would be required to disclose to state regulators about their pricing.

    The companies would report this information, most of it to be kept confidential, to a new state agency empowered to monitor and investigate the petroleum market and subpoena oil company executives. The commission will rely on the work of this agency, plus a panel of experts, to decide whether to impose a penalty on oil company profits and how much that penalty should be.

    “If we force folks to turn over this information, I actually don’t believe we’ll ever need a penalty because the fact that they have to tell us what’s going on will stop them from gouging our consumers,” said Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan, a Democrat from Orinda.

    California’s gas prices are always higher than the rest of the country because of the state’s taxes and regulations. California has the second-highest gas tax in the country at 54 cents per gallon. And it requires a special blend of gasoline that is better for the environment but more expensive to produce.

    But state regulators say those taxes and fees aren’t enough to explain last summer, when the average cost of a gallon of gasoline in California was more than $2.60 higher than the national average.

    “There’s truly no other explanation for these historically high prices other than greed,” said Assemblymember Pilar Schiavo, a Democrat from Chatsworth. “The problem is we don’t have the information that we need to prove this, and we don’t have the ability to penalize the kind of historic price gouging we saw last year.”

    The oil industry recorded massive profits last year, following years of huge losses during the pandemic when more people stayed home and fewer people were on the road.

    Eloy Garcia, lobbyist for the Western States Petroleum Association, said California’s high gas prices are the result of decades of public policy decisions that have made the state an island in the global petroleum market and driven many oil refiners out of the state. He noted California does not have a pipeline to send oil into the state, meaning it has to ship what it can’t produce itself from the ocean, which takes longer and costs more.

    “We’re not like Texas. We’re not like Louisiana. We’re not like the Northeast,” Garcia said. “We do not have a fungible fuel supply. We have chosen to do that. We have set ourself up by 30 years of public policy.”

    Garcia said Monday’s vote “sends a clear signal not to invest in California.”

    Lauren Sanchez, who is Newsom’s senior climate adviser, said the state has plenty of supply, noting California oil refineries exported 12% of their product to other states last year.

    “We’re also the third-largest gasoline market in the world for these companies,” she said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Kimberly Palmer: How to use a tax refund to fight inflation

    Kimberly Palmer: How to use a tax refund to fight inflation

    [ad_1]

    If inflation has eaten away at your budget the way waves erode a beach, then your tax refund might just provide a much-needed protective barrier.

    As of March, prices are up 6% over the past 12 months, according to the most recent consumer price index. At the same time, just over half of filers (55%) are expecting tax refunds for the 2022 tax year, with an average expected refund of $2,205, according to the 2023 Nerdwallet Tax Report. Financial experts say consumers can use that windfall — which is really just a delayed paycheck that you already earned — to help offset the strain of those higher prices.

    “Tax refunds are going to arrive at just the right time for many consumers this spring,” says Drew Wessell, a certified financial planner at Fiduciary Financial Advisors in Grand Rapids, Michigan.

    UNLOAD HIGH-INTEREST DEBT

    With rising interest rates, variable-rate debt becomes more expensive — including credit cards. That’s why many financial experts put paying off debt at the top of the priority list, even considering it a type of investment.

    “Using your tax refund to pay off a credit card debt with a 20% interest rate gives you an instant, tax-free 20% return on that investment. It’s not a creative idea, but the math makes it the most impactful action that a consumer can take,” Wessell says.

    SAVE IN A HIGH-YIELD ACCOUNT

    Rising rates also mean rising yields on savings accounts, so you can save your refund and earn more on it. “If you already have a high-yield savings account, you can also look at CDs,” says Marguerita Cheng , a certified financial planner and the founder of Blue Ocean Global Wealth in Gaithersburg, Maryland. CDs, or certificates of deposit, offer higher yields in exchange for less liquidity.

    Wessell advises saving enough to start or boost an emergency fund, which could help you in the event of a sudden unexpected expense or job loss. “Life is full of surprises, and having an emergency fund helps you avoid going into another debt spiral,” he says.

    FUND LONG-TERM GOALS

    Because higher prices have cut into long-term savings goals like retirement and college, a refund can offer an opportunity to get back on track, Cheng says. “You don’t have to put a lot in, but it can be the seed money,” she adds, noting that her son is using his first refund as he begins his career to open a Roth IRA.

    Similarly, you could take care of other delayed financial tasks, such as buying life insurance. “Revisit your family situation,” Cheng urges, especially if you have younger children.

    UPGRADE YOUR HOME

    In many real estate markets, rising home prices along with the higher interest rates make it harder to buy your dream home. Instead, use your refund to improve your current home, suggests Ryan Greiser, a certified financial planner and the founder of the financial firm Opulus in Doylestown, Pennsylvania. New flooring, energy-efficient appliances or improved windows can boost your home’s energy efficiency as well as increase its value.

    “We love the idea of people loving the space they live in,” Greiser says, especially when they’re priced out of buying a new home.

    For your outdoor space, invest in a chicken coop and gardening supplies to harvest eggs and vegetables — all of which have become pricier at the grocery store — suggests Tim Melia, a certified financial planner who is the principal and financial planner at Embolden Financial Planning in Seattle. If you have neighbors with skills such as carpentry, you could barter with them for additional savings.

    CREATE MORE INCOME

    Remodeling a room in your home to create a rental unit could generate income that helps offset inflation for years, says Melia, who operates a couple of short-term lodging options through vacation rental website Airbnb. He says upfront investments could include better furniture and decor: “You want to be able to stand out.”

    Similarly, investing in yourself by taking classes for a new skill or certification could increase your income. “It increases your potential to earn and can allow you to step into a more lucrative career or take the next step in your existing career,” Melia adds.

    FIND SMALL WAYS TO TREAT YOURSELF

    While air travel and other bigger splurges might be prohibitively expensive, your refund can give you more affordable pleasures, even after taking care of other priorities, Cheng says. She indulges in listening to audiobooks (most recently “Spare” by Prince Harry). “I was getting anxiety watching the news at the gym, so instead, I listen to audiobooks,” she says.

    ADJUST YOUR WITHHOLDINGS

    Lastly, if you’re receiving a refund, it means you overpaid taxes in 2022. You might be better off adjusting your withholdings so you receive more in each paycheck instead. “If you’re getting more than $3,000, then you probably want to revisit your withholdings because that could be $200 to $300 a month,” Cheng says.

    And that could help offset those higher gas, restaurant or grocery bills all year long.

    This column was provided to The Associated Press by the personal finance website NerdWallet. The content is for educational and informational purposes and does not constitute investment advice.

    ________________________

    Kimberly Palmer is a personal finance expert at NerdWallet and the author of “Smart Mom, Rich Mom.” Email: kpalmer@nerdwallet.com. Twitter: @KimberlyPalmer.

    RELATED LINK:

    NerdWallet: 2023 Tax Report https://bit.ly/nerdwallet-2023-tax-report

    METHODOLOGY:

    This survey was conducted online within the United States by The Harris Poll on behalf of NerdWallet from Dec. 6-8, 2022, among 2,041 U.S. adults 18 and older, among whom 1,777 will file a 2022 federal tax return. The sampling precision of Harris online polls is measured by using a Bayesian credible interval. For this study, the sample data is accurate to within +/- 2.8 percentage points using a 95% confidence level.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Here’s how your tax bill could change under Biden’s budget

    Here’s how your tax bill could change under Biden’s budget

    [ad_1]

    What’s in Biden’s budget plan?


    Biden’s budget plan calls for increasing taxes on the wealthy

    04:58

    When President Biden earlier this month released his budget for the next fiscal year, his priorities included raising trillions of dollars in taxes to help reduce the federal deficit by almost $3 trillion over the next decade.

    Now, the Tax Policy Center has analyzed the budget and estimated the impact on U.S. taxpayers based on their income. Some lower-income Americans could end up benefiting, while the wealthiest households could see a significant increase their tax burden, the think tank said.

    To be sure, Mr. Biden’s budget isn’t set in stone — instead, it reflects a starting point for negotiations with lawmakers, who ultimately craft and pass spending bills and new tax laws. But the White House’s push to raise taxes on the wealthy reflects a push to place a higher burden on the richest Americans in order to increase funding for education, housing and health care, among other priorities. 

    “As Biden has made clear since his 2020 campaign, he wants to raise taxes substantially on high-income households and corporations and provide modest tax cuts to low- and moderate-income households,” wrote Tax Policy Center senior fellow Howard Gleckman in a blog post. “And, like it or not, that’s what his budget does.”

    Many middle-class families would effectively see no changes in their after-tax income under Biden’s proposed budget, according to the analysis. 

    The biggest lever hiking taxes on high-income households is tied to the Biden administration’s proposal to boost the highest rate on capital gains taxes from 20% to 39.6%, the Tax Policy Center noted. 


    What the Child Tax Credit is and who qualifies for it

    03:22

    The proposed budget also includes a 20% minimum tax on people with more than $100 million in wealth, but the Tax Policy Center notes that would affect only about 20,000 U.S. households. Still, the impact “would be substantial,” it noted.

    Lower-income households would see a benefit from a proposed expansion of the Child Tax Credit and the Earned Income Tax Credit, the group noted.


    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Washington Supreme Court upholds effort to balance tax code

    Washington Supreme Court upholds effort to balance tax code

    [ad_1]

    SEATTLE — The Washington Supreme Court on Friday upheld the state’s new capital gains tax, which was adopted by lawmakers in an effort to balance what is considered the nation’s most regressive tax code.

    In a 7-2 decision, the justices found the tax to be an excise tax — not a property tax, which the state Constitution limits to 1% annually, or an income tax, which Supreme Court decisions dating to the 1930s have found unconstitutional.

    “For 134 years, Washington state has been waiting for the day when a fairer tax system came about, one where working people were not carrying an inequitable share of the burden,” Gov. Jay Inslee, a Democrat, said in a statement. “Today is that day. Washington’s capital gains tax helps right an upside-down tax structure where low-income Washingtonians ultimately expend a much larger share of their income in taxes than our wealthiest residents.”

    Washington is one of nine states without an income tax, and its heavy reliance on sales and fuel taxes to pay for schools, roads and other public expenses falls disproportionately on low-income residents. They pay at least six times more in taxes as a percentage of household income than the wealthiest residents do, according to lawmakers. Middle-income residents pay two to four times as much.

    Inslee and other majority Democrats in Olympia sought to begin addressing that in 2021, when they enacted a 7% capital gains tax on the sale of stocks, bonds and other high-end assets, with exemptions for the first $250,000 each year and gains from sales of retirement accounts, real estate and certain small businesses.

    It was expected to be paid by 7,000 people — fewer than 1 in every 1,000 residents — and to bring in close to a half-billion dollars a year to help pay for public education in Washington. But it faced a legal challenge from wealthy residents and business and agricultural organizations that said it violates the state and federal constitutions and would discourage the investment in the state.

    The challengers argued the state’s labeling of the capital gains tax as an excise tax was merely designed to conceal its true nature as an income tax. An excise tax is broadly defined as a tax on certain goods, services or activities — in this case, not a tax on property or income, but on what someone does with that property by selling it, the state insisted.

    The 41 states that tax capital gains tax it as income. Seven other states have no income taxes at all: Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas and Wyoming. New Hampshire taxes only dividends and interest income earned by individual taxpayers.

    “Today’s ruling by the State Supreme Court is at odds with the legal opinion of every other state in the country and the federal government,” Jackson Maynard, general counsel of the Building Industry Association of Washington, which sued over the tax, said in an emailed statement. “This makes Washington state the only place in the country where a capital gains tax is not considered an income tax. This is a radical departure, creating an undesirable inconsistency that will cripple our state’s competitiveness and drive more businesses out of our state.”

    Washington voters overwhelmingly passed a graduated income tax in 1932. But in a 5-4 decision the following year, the state Supreme Court struck it down, ruling that a tax on income was a tax on property — and the state Constitution says property taxes must be uniform and limited to 1% per year.

    Last year, Douglas County Superior Court Judge Brian Huber in central Washington sided with those challenging the capital gains tax as a forbidden income tax. Democratic Attorney General Bob Ferguson appealed, saying Huber got it wrong because the tax is not on property — it’s on what an owner does with that property by selling it.

    The arguments came as progressives are making a push in several states to have the rich pay more in taxes. Bills introduced early this year in California, New York, Illinois, Hawaii, Maryland, Minnesota, Washington and Connecticut all revolved around the idea that the richest Americans need to pay more. Those proposals all faced questionable prospects.

    The challengers noted that since the 1930s, Washington’s voters have 10 times rejected constitutional amendments or initiatives in favor of income taxes.

    If Washington wants such a tax, “the way forward is to amend the Constitution,” former Republican Attorney General Rob McKenna argued on behalf of the challengers during oral arguments in January.

    The justices hustled out their decision because the first payments on the tax are due next month, and lawmakers needed to know whether they’d be able to spend the money.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Washington Supreme Court upholds effort to balance tax code

    Washington Supreme Court upholds effort to balance tax code

    [ad_1]

    SEATTLE — The Washington Supreme Court on Friday upheld the state’s new capital gains tax, which was adopted by lawmakers in an effort to balance what is considered the nation’s most regressive tax code.

    In a 7-2 decision, the justices found the tax to be an excise tax — not a property tax, which the state Constitution limits to 1% annually, or an income tax, which Supreme Court decisions dating to the 1930s have found unconstitutional.

    “For 134 years, Washington state has been waiting for the day when a fairer tax system came about, one where working people were not carrying an inequitable share of the burden,” Gov. Jay Inslee, a Democrat, said in a statement. “Today is that day. Washington’s capital gains tax helps right an upside-down tax structure where low-income Washingtonians ultimately expend a much larger share of their income in taxes than our wealthiest residents.”

    Washington is one of nine states without an income tax, and its heavy reliance on sales and fuel taxes to pay for schools, roads and other public expenses falls disproportionately on low-income residents. They pay at least six times more in taxes as a percentage of household income than the wealthiest residents do, according to lawmakers. Middle-income residents pay two to four times as much.

    Inslee and other majority Democrats in Olympia sought to begin addressing that in 2021, when they enacted a 7% capital gains tax on the sale of stocks, bonds and other high-end assets, with exemptions for the first $250,000 each year and gains from sales of retirement accounts, real estate and certain small businesses.

    It was expected to be paid by 7,000 people — fewer than 1 in every 1,000 residents — and to bring in close to a half-billion dollars a year to help pay for public education in Washington. But it faced a legal challenge from wealthy residents and business and agricultural organizations that said it violates the state and federal constitutions and would discourage the investment in the state.

    The challengers argued the state’s labeling of the capital gains tax as an excise tax was merely designed to conceal its true nature as an income tax. An excise tax is broadly defined as a tax on certain goods, services or activities — in this case, not a tax on property or income, but on what someone does with that property by selling it, the state insisted.

    The 41 states that tax capital gains tax it as income. Seven other states have no income taxes at all: Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas and Wyoming. New Hampshire taxes only dividends and interest income earned by individual taxpayers.

    “Today’s ruling by the State Supreme Court is at odds with the legal opinion of every other state in the country and the federal government,” Jackson Maynard, general counsel of the Building Industry Association of Washington, which sued over the tax, said in an emailed statement. “This makes Washington state the only place in the country where a capital gains tax is not considered an income tax. This is a radical departure, creating an undesirable inconsistency that will cripple our state’s competitiveness and drive more businesses out of our state.”

    Washington voters overwhelmingly passed a graduated income tax in 1932. But in a 5-4 decision the following year, the state Supreme Court struck it down, ruling that a tax on income was a tax on property — and the state Constitution says property taxes must be uniform and limited to 1% per year.

    Last year, Douglas County Superior Court Judge Brian Huber in central Washington sided with those challenging the capital gains tax as a forbidden income tax. Democratic Attorney General Bob Ferguson appealed, saying Huber got it wrong because the tax is not on property — it’s on what an owner does with that property by selling it.

    The arguments came as progressives are making a push in several states to have the rich pay more in taxes. Bills introduced early this year in California, New York, Illinois, Hawaii, Maryland, Minnesota, Washington and Connecticut all revolved around the idea that the richest Americans need to pay more. Those proposals all faced questionable prospects.

    The challengers noted that since the 1930s, Washington’s voters have 10 times rejected constitutional amendments or initiatives in favor of income taxes.

    If Washington wants such a tax, “the way forward is to amend the Constitution,” former Republican Attorney General Rob McKenna argued on behalf of the challengers during oral arguments in January.

    The justices hustled out their decision because the first payments on the tax are due next month, and lawmakers needed to know whether they’d be able to spend the money.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • 10 Important Tax Numbers Every Business Owner Should Know to Save | Entrepreneur

    10 Important Tax Numbers Every Business Owner Should Know to Save | Entrepreneur

    [ad_1]

    Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

    I’m a certified public accountant but my firm doesn’t prepare tax returns. However, I’m also a business owner. This means, like my best clients, I pay close attention to my taxes. Why? Because for a business owner, taxes are usually one of our biggest expenses. If you’re running a business, these are 10 federal tax numbers that are very important for all of us in 2023.

    $160,200

    This is the maximum amount of wages that can be taxed for social security (FICA) benefits at 6.2% (the 1.45% Medicare tax has no limit). Any wages paid over this amount are not subject to the FICA tax — employee or employer. This is important because if you raise an employee’s compensation above this amount, they’re receiving an added tax benefit which should be part of your salary considerations this year.

    Related: These Are the Top Tax Filing Mistakes Made by Small Business Owners (and How to Avoid Them)

    $6,500

    This is the amount you can contribute to an individual Roth IRA account. Roth IRAs often get ignored by my clients but they’re a fantastic way to put after-tax money away and watch it grow tax-free with no penalties or additional taxes on withdrawal. Because the stock market is down, I have a number of older clients taking distributions from their 401(k)s, paying the tax on a lower capital gain, and then transitioning those amounts to a Roth where the amounts are never taxed again. Everyone should be putting money into a Roth IRA.

    $7,500

    This is an added “catch-up” contribution that can be made to your 401(k) account if you’re over the age of 50 — which means that more than half of business owners in the U.S. are probably eligible. There’s also a $1,000 catch-up for individual IRAs for people in this age group. Thanks to the recently passed Secure 2.0, the 401(k) catch-up amount is going to rise to as much as $10,000 annually for those between the ages of 60 and 63 starting in 2025 and will then be adjusted for inflation each year.

    $66,000

    That’s the amount that can be contributed to a 401(k) plan this year which includes both employer and employee contributions and does not include any “catch-up” contributions. This amount is limited to your income and discrimination tests (see below).

    $150,000

    That’s the amount of compensation that defines a “highly compensated employee.” This is important because the number of people you have in your 401(k) retirement plan that earns over this amount will figure into your plan’s year-end discrimination testing and that may limit the amount you — and they — can save. The takeaway: The more employees —particularly non-highly compensated employees — that contribute to your 401(k) plan, the more you can contribute.

    Related: 3 Ways to Save Money on Taxes That Most Entrepreneurs Miss

    $0.655

    That’s the IRS-reimbursable mileage rate for 2023 and it changes every year based on the fluctuating costs of operating a vehicle. This is important because you can reimburse your employee for any miles traveled above the commute to your office (for example to a customer) and you’ll get a tax deduction — and the amount won’t be taxable to them. This is potentially a great added benefit to provide for your staff, particularly in these times of high gas costs.

    $300

    This is the amount you can pay your employees each month to reimburse for their commuting expenses. You’ll get a deduction and they won’t be taxed. If an employee drives to work, you can also pay them $300 to reimburse for their parking expenses with the same tax treatment. It’s another benefit to consider and could be a helpful enticement to get your people back into the office more often.

    $1,160,000

    That’s the maximum Section 179 deduction you can take this year for the acquisition of capital assets. This applies to both new and used assets like capital equipment, machinery, furniture and most computer software. There are “bonus” depreciation deductions that your business can take in addition to the Section 179 amounts. You can even finance these purchases and get these deductions — just make sure they’re “in service” by year-end.

    $12,920,000

    That’s the individual federal estate lifetime tax exemption which means that a married couple can leave more than $25 million of their assets upon their deaths tax-free to the beneficiaries. After that, most transfers of assets will be taxed at 40%. This exemption gets reduced to $7,000,000 individually in 2026.

    $17,000

    This is the amount you can gift this year and the recipient won’t be taxed. This is in addition to the lifetime addition above and applies to anyone, not just family members.

    You know what’s coming next, right? It’s the usual caveat where I write that your situation may be unique and you should always consult your tax professional before making any decisions based on the above numbers.

    [ad_2]

    Gene Marks

    Source link

  • TaxAct filing expert simplifies taxes for college athletes earning NIL income [PAID CONTENT]

    TaxAct filing expert simplifies taxes for college athletes earning NIL income [PAID CONTENT]

    [ad_1]

    TaxAct filing expert simplifies taxes for college athletes earning NIL income [PAID CONTENT] – CBS News


    Watch CBS News



    TaxAct’s tax expert Jackson Echols shares tax tips for student-athletes navigating tax season after NCAA policy changes.

    Be the first to know

    Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.


    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Rent control policies are gaining support nationwide. Here’s why economists still think it’s a bad idea.

    Rent control policies are gaining support nationwide. Here’s why economists still think it’s a bad idea.

    [ad_1]

    In December 2022, $1,981 was the typical monthly rent in the United States — a 7.4% increase from the year prior. But while rent has begun to stabilize nationwide, rent affordability remains difficult for many Americans. 

    “There’s literally nowhere in the country where a tenant is not burdened by their rent,” according to Leah Simon-Weisberg, an adjunct professor of law at UC San Francisco.

    In response, support for rent control policies has gained traction.

    But this isn’t the first time such policies have had widespread support. After the massive economic disruption caused by World War II, the federal government imposed rent control on roughly 80% of rental housing between 1941 and 1964.

    Over time, it was abandoned because prominent economists unanimously argued against the policy. That sentiment mostly continues today.

    “There are various surveys of economists. One done by IMG showed that only 2% thought that rent controls in places like New York and San Francisco were having a positive impact on affordable housing,” said Jay Parsons, chief economist at RealPage.

    Economists argue that rent control would deter developers from building more homes, which would only worsen the housing supply crisis in the United States.

    America already suffers from a deficit of 3.8 million homes, especially at low-income price points, according to Habitat for Humanity.

    “We have not invested as a nation in building the supply of housing in a variety of communities, in a variety of different price points. We’ve instead relied on the private sector to do so,” said Sharon Wilson Géno, president of the National Multifamily Housing Council. “But unless that money comes into the market and investors see that as a better investment than some other kind of equity or some other kind of investment, they’re not going to come.”

    Watch the video to find out why so many economists are against the idea of widespread rent control.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • These bogus

    These bogus

    [ad_1]

    A so-called tax hack touted on social media could get you into big trouble with the IRS, as well as fail to deliver the juicy refund it purports to deliver. 

    The agency is warning taxpayers not to fall for advice that urges them to use tax software to fill out W2s with fake income information, with some scammers suggesting that people make up large income and withholding figures in order to get big refunds. 

    W2s are tax forms sent by employers to workers that show their annual income and the amount of federal income tax that has been withheld, retirement contributions and more. An employee uses that information to fill out their Form 1040 — their individual income tax return — which contributes to the calculation about whether they are owed a refund or, alternately, owe money to the IRS. The bigger the withholding, the potentially bigger the refund. 

    But making up fake information on a W2 is a sure-fire way to get in hot water with the IRS, which receives copies of W2s from employers and matches them with the data filed on individuals’ 1040s, tax and security experts said. 

    The scam comes during a year when tax refunds are about 10% lower than a year earlier, while many households are struggling with high inflation.

    “There are all these individuals [on social media] purporting to be tax experts, but they are really scamming attention by showing these tax hacks,” said Amir Tarighat, CEO of cybersecurity company Agency. “They really aren’t even selling anything other than, ‘Follow me for more tricks.’”

    “It’s definitely bad advice,” he added.

    Those tricks can lead to violations of tax law, ending up with the taxpayer facing IRS penalties and fines. The agency warned that people who use such tactics can face a range of penalties, including a $5,000 penalty for filing a frivolous return as well as the risk of criminal prosecution for filing a false tax return. 

    Scammers may be banking that tax filers can beat the clock by filing a return before the IRS can verify matching data from an employer’s W2, said Keith Hall, a CPA and CEO of the National Association for the Self-Employed. 

    “If you send in a tax return that has W2 information that includes withholding, the IRS will process that pretty quickly, in advance of that matching process,” Hall said. But, he added, “The people who do [falsify information] will ultimately get caught.”

    He added, “If someone says you can get a big refund by making up a W2, walk away as fast as you can.”

    Fake employees and a non-existent tax credit

    A few other variations on the W2 tax scam are also on the rise, the IRS said. 

    One version involves people making up fake employees who purportedly work in their household and filing a Schedule H for Household Employment Taxes. The idea is to claim a refund based on fake sick and family wages that, in reality, they never paid. 

    A second variation involves using Form 7202 for Credits for Sick Leave and Family Leave for Certain Self-Employed Individuals — but this tax credit was only available for self-employed workers in 2020 and 2021 during the pandemic. The tax credit has since expired and is no longer available for tax year 2022, the IRS said.

    “[T]here is no secret way to get free money or a big refund,” said IRS Acting IRS Commissioner Doug O’Donnell in a statement. “People should not make up income and try to submit a fraudulent tax return in hopes of getting a huge refund.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How small business owners can save this tax season

    How small business owners can save this tax season

    [ad_1]

    How small business owners can save this tax season – CBS News


    Watch CBS News



    Some small business owners could be in for a shock this tax season. Rebecca Walser, a tax attorney and president of Walser Wealth Management, joins CBS News’s Elaine Quijano and Jericka Duncan with more.

    Be the first to know

    Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.


    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Joe Biden plans new taxes on the rich to help save Medicare

    Joe Biden plans new taxes on the rich to help save Medicare

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden on Tuesday proposed new taxes on the rich to help fund Medicare, saying the plan would help to extend the insurance program’s solvency by 25 years and provide a degree of middle-class stability to millions of older adults.

    In his plan, Biden is overtly declaring that the wealthy ought to shoulder a heavier tax burden. His budget would draw a direct line between those new taxes and the popular health insurance program for people older than 65, essentially asking those who’ve fared best in the economy to subsidize the rest of the population.

    Biden wants to increase the Medicare tax rate from 3.8% to 5% on income exceeding $400,000 per year, including salaries and capital gains. The White House did not provide specific cost-saving estimates with the proposal, but the move would likely increase tax revenues by more than $117 billion over 10 years, according to prior estimates in February by the Tax Policy Center.

    “This modest increase in Medicare contributions from those with the highest incomes will help keep the Medicare program strong for decades to come,” Biden wrote in a Tuesday essay in The New York Times. He called Medicare a “rock-solid guarantee that Americans have counted on to be there for them when they retire.”

    Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., was quick to dismiss the plan, telling reporters on Tuesday that Biden’s budget agenda “will not see the light of day.”

    More than 65 million people rely on Medicare at a cost to taxpayers of roughly $900 billion every year. The number of Medicare enrollees is expected to continue growing as the U.S. population ages. But funding for the program is a problem with federal officials warning that, without cuts or tax increases, the Medicare fund might only be able to pay for 90% of benefits by 2028.

    Biden’s suggested Medicare changes are part of a fuller budget proposal that he plans to release on Thursday in Philadelphia. Pushing the proposal through Congress will likely be difficult, with Republicans in control of the House and Democrats holding only a slim majority in the Senate.

    The proposal is a direct challenge to GOP lawmakers, who argue that economic growth comes from tax cuts like those pushed through by former President Donald Trump in 2017. Those cuts disproportionately favored wealthier households and companies. They contributed to higher budget deficits, when growth failed to boom as Trump had promised and the economy was then derailed in 2020 by the coronavirus pandemic.

    The conflicting worldviews on how taxes would impact the economy is part of a broader showdown. Biden and Congress need to reach a deal to raise the government’s borrowing authority at some point this summer, or else the government could default and plunge the U.S. into a debilitating recession.

    Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform and an advocate for the kinds of tax cuts generally favored by Republicans, said that the U.S. economy would suffer because of the president’s plan.

    “The Biden tax hikes will raise the cost of goods and services for everyone, and make American workers and businesses less competitive internationally and vs. China,” Norquist said.

    But Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, applauded the plan despite having some reservations about it.

    “The president’s plan would generate hundreds of billions of dollars – perhaps even approaching a trillion dollars – to strengthen Medicare,” said MacGuineas, a fiscal watchdog focused on deficit reduction.

    White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre declined to discuss the numbers behind the budget plan. She told reporters at Tuesday’s briefing that she would not “dive into the math,” but that Biden’s proposal on Thursday “will be very detailed and transparent.”

    The independent, nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office will analyze the proposal later this year.

    William Arnone, chief executive of the National Academy of Social Insurance, says there’s some risk in taxing wealthier Americans more for the program, given that they already pay more in premiums for Medicare coverage as well.

    “At some point higher-income Medicare enrollees may say: ‘This isn’t a good deal for me anymore,’” Arnone said. “The genius of social insurance is that we all pay in, and we all get something out in return. If higher income people start to question the equity – that could lead to a loss confidence in the program.” His group is an advocacy organization for Medicare and other entitlement programs.

    Ahead of an expected budget feud and the 2024 campaign season, Democrats have ramped up talk around Medicare, vowing to fend off any Republican attempts to cut the program, although so far the GOP has vowed to avoid any cuts. Still, Republican lawmakers have reached little consensus on how to fulfill their promise to put the government on a path toward balancing the federal budget in the next 10 years.

    Last year, members of the House Republican Study Committee proposed raising the eligibility age for Medicare to 67, which would match Social Security. But that idea hasn’t moved forward in a split Congress.

    Republicans have denied that they plan to cut the program. A proposal from Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., that would require Congress to reconsider all federal laws every five years, including Medicare, has gotten little traction.

    Raising taxes on Americans who make more than $250,000 to pay for Medicare has broad support among older Americans, but raising the eligibility age for Medicare, is widely unpopular, said Mary Johnson, a policy analyst for the nonpartisan Senior Citizens League who has researched the issue.

    Politicians who try that route might “lose supporters and it can backfire. You can wind up losing your office, too,” she said. “A very high percentage of seniors are voting in elections.”

    Biden’s plan is also intended to close what the White House describes as loopholes that allow people to avoid Medicare taxes on some income. Besides the taxes, Biden wants to expand Medicare’s ability to negotiate drug costs, which began with the Inflation Reduction Act. He signed the sweeping legislation last year.

    The White House said its budget plan would expand the pharmaceutical drug provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act. More drugs would be subject to price negotiations, other drugs would be brought into the negotiation process sooner and the scope of rebates would be expanded.

    Taken together, Biden’s new proposals would help shore up a key trust fund that pays for Medicare, which provides health care for older adults. According to the White House, the changes would keep the fund solvent until the 2050s, about 25 years longer than currently expected.

    Changes would also be made to Medicare benefits. Biden wants to limit cost sharing for some generic drugs to only $2. The idea would lower out-of-pocket costs for treating hypertension, high cholesterol and other ailments.

    ___

    AP writers Amanda Seitz and Farnoush Amiri contributed to this report. Follow the AP’s coverage of Medicare at https://apnews.com/hub/medicare

    [ad_2]

    Source link