Menu

Pass Thru Deduction Explained

Home Tax Reduction Pass Thru Deduction Explained

  • Avatar docnews 
    Participant
    Status: Physician
    Posts: 412
    Joined: 01/09/2016

    I think this s what you’re referring to:

     

    http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/senate-tax-bill-would-impose-high-marginal-tax-rates-some-pass-through-owners

     

    Consider the example of a married couple whose entire income is “specified service” income generated by a pass-through entity and who claims the standard deduction. At an income of $524,000, the couple could take an $87,000 deduction (17.4 percent of the couple’s taxable income “without regard” to the deduction) that would reduce their taxes by $30,450 (since they are in the 35 percent tax bracket), but the deduction is entirely phased out at an income of $624,000. On average, that amounts to more than a 30% surtax on top of the 35% statutory tax rate over that range of income.

    The actual phase-out is much more complicated, as the bill’s text released Monday night makes clear, because the deduction continues to apply even as its benefit is phased out. (If that sounds convoluted, it’s because it is.) The couple’s marginal income tax rate would jump to 61.375 percent at $528,541 of income. And it would rise to 73 percent until their income reaches $624,000 and the deduction is fully phased-out, at which point their marginal tax rate would return to the 35 percent ordinary income tax rate. (Note that these calculations do not include the additional 3.8 percent in self-employment payroll tax or the net investment income tax).

     

    Maybe someone can shed some light on this

    Click to expand…

    You just linked to the initial Senate bill which is not the compromise bill up for vote. In the compromise the marginal tax rate does jump to 50% at $400k-$415k for those with service businesses they own.

    #89222 Reply
    Liked by Caligas
    PhysicianOnFIRE PhysicianOnFIRE 
    Moderator
    Status: Physician
    Posts: 1542
    Joined: 01/08/2016
    A DAF is kind of a jerk move that way- you get the tax break, you give yourself a pat on the back, but the charity doesn’t get squat.

    Click to expand…

    I wouldn’t call any form of charitable giving a “jerk move,” whether it’s immediate or delayed. Any money contributed to a DAF must be granted to a bona fide 501(c)(3) charity at some point.

    It seems to me I’ll need the charitable deduction just as much next year as this year, so I see no point in doing that. In fact, it won’t be reduced by the Pease phaseouts next year, so it’s even better then.

    Click to expand…

    You’ve got it backwards. The Pease limitation was a straight surtax of 1% to 1.2% disguised as a limitation on itemized deductions. Kitces explains it well here. Your marginal tax rate will be reduced by that 1% or so next year, making it even more advantageous to make the donation before the Pease limitation is repealed.

    The difference between the 37% bracket and the 39.6% bracket just doesn’t seem like a big enough deal to me to give this year instead of next when you consider the opportunity cost too and the DAF fees.

    Click to expand…

    The difference is at least 2.6% plus an additional 1% as mentioned above. If you’re tithing and giving six-figures per year, that’s at least a few thousand dollars extra for the church. I’m sure they could find a use for a few thousand dollars per year. As far as having to use money earmarked for something else? Money is fungible. Dollars in the taxable account will be replaced with income in the coming years while donations could come from the DAF.

    I would also encourage you to calculate the difference between the typical DAF fee of 0.6% or less and the tax drag on your mutual funds and ETFs in your taxable account. My tax drag works out to be 29% capital gains (15% +3.8% NIIT + 9.85% state income tax) times about a 2% dividend. Or about 0.6%. It’s a wash. Yours will be pretty much identical — lower state tax, but 20% capital gains.

    I see these misconceptions quite often. I’m tempted to call them excuses (guess I just did). In my latest DAF post, I made an attempt to debunk some of the more common mistaken assumptions and myths: Debunking Donor Advised Fund Myths

    I mean no disrespect; I know you’ve donated far more than I have to your chosen charities, but I have a hard time understanding your aversion to using a donor advised fund.

    Best,

    -PoF

     

    40-something anesthesiologist and personal finance blogger @ https://physicianonfire.com [Part of the WCI Network] Find me on Twitter: @physicianonfire

    FIRE. Financial Independence. Retire Early.

    #89250 Reply
    The White Coat Investor The White Coat Investor 
    Keymaster
    Status: Physician
    Posts: 4601
    Joined: 05/13/2011

    A DAF is kind of a jerk move that way- you get the tax break, you give yourself a pat on the back, but the charity doesn’t get squat.

    Click to expand…

    I wouldn’t call any form of charitable giving a “jerk move,” whether it’s immediate or delayed. Any money contributed to a DAF must be granted to a bona fide 501(c)(3) charity at some point.

    It seems to me I’ll need the charitable deduction just as much next year as this year, so I see no point in doing that. In fact, it won’t be reduced by the Pease phaseouts next year, so it’s even better then.

    Click to expand…

    You’ve got it backwards. The Pease limitation was a straight surtax of 1% to 1.2% disguised as a limitation on itemized deductions. Kitces explains it well here. Your marginal tax rate will be reduced by that 1% or so next year, making it even more advantageous to make the donation before the Pease limitation is repealed.

    The difference between the 37% bracket and the 39.6% bracket just doesn’t seem like a big enough deal to me to give this year instead of next when you consider the opportunity cost too and the DAF fees.

    Click to expand…

    The difference is at least 2.6% plus an additional 1% as mentioned above. If you’re tithing and giving six-figures per year, that’s at least a few thousand dollars extra for the church. I’m sure they could find a use for a few thousand dollars per year. As far as having to use money earmarked for something else? Money is fungible. Dollars in the taxable account will be replaced with income in the coming years while donations could come from the DAF.

    I would also encourage you to calculate the difference between the typical DAF fee of 0.6% or less and the tax drag on your mutual funds and ETFs in your taxable account. My tax drag works out to be 29% capital gains (15% +3.8% NIIT + 9.85% state income tax) times about a 2% dividend. Or about 0.6%. It’s a wash. Yours will be pretty much identical — lower state tax, but 20% capital gains.

    I see these misconceptions quite often. I’m tempted to call them excuses (guess I just did). In my latest DAF post, I made an attempt to debunk some of the more common mistaken assumptions and myths: Debunking Donor Advised Fund Myths

    I mean no disrespect; I know you’ve donated far more than I have to your chosen charities, but I have a hard time understanding your aversion to using a donor advised fund.

    Best,

    -PoF

     

    Click to expand…

    Tax drag is minimal if you never realize any gains. In fact, it could be negative thanks to tax loss harvesting. But it’s basically the 2% yield x 23.6%, so 0.47%. Less than the 0.6% fee. And we haven’t mentioned the hassle factor. And it’s only good for one year. Next year, putting it in the DAF and then giving it is exactly the same as just donating it. So let’s say I give $100K to charity next year. If I put it in a DAF today, and pull it out of the DAF on January 1st and give it to the charity, I save 40.6%-37% x 100K = $3600 in taxes vs giving it to the charity on 1/1 directly. (Of course you’re right on the Pease bit, I was hoping you wouldn’t catch that.)

    Okay, you’ve almost convinced me to make double donations this year. But I still can’t quite figure out why using a DAF is any better than just giving the $100K to the charity right now. If I had another $100K that I felt like I could give to charity right now, I would have already given it to charity. What’s the point of making the pit stop in the DAF? I don’t think the charity cares if it gets the money on 12/31 or 1/1. Only the IRS cares. Why dole out your charitable giving over the years? Why would that be better than giving it all right now? If you have it, don’t need it, and think the charity could use it more than you could, give it away. Right now. Why let it sit in there getting eaten by DAF fees and depriving both you and the charity from using it?

    Why do you think that letting money sit in your DAF for a decade before giving it is better than just giving it? Who do you think is benefitting from it sitting there?

    Site/Forum Owner, Emergency Physician, Blogger, and author of The White Coat Investor: A Doctor's Guide to Personal Finance and Investing
    Helping Those Who Wear The White Coat Get A "Fair Shake" on Wall Street since 2011

    #89289 Reply
    Liked by docnews
    Avatar docnews 
    Participant
    Status: Physician
    Posts: 412
    Joined: 01/09/2016

    You greedy doctors would fight on how to be best charitable 😉

    I go back and forth on DAF but I lean toward WCI’s point of let the money do good now. The best use of a DAF is a lottery winner or large inheritance that is so large you want to give your self time to think / research the best use of the charitable money you wish to give.

    #89302 Reply
    The White Coat Investor The White Coat Investor 
    Keymaster
    Status: Physician
    Posts: 4601
    Joined: 05/13/2011

    Okay, I just had a long discussion with Katie. I think we’re actually going to take some of the money we have set aside for taxes and donate it all to charity this year. Our only schedule A deductions next year will be $10K in state/property taxes and charity. Without any charitable contributions, we wouldn’t even itemize in 2018. So we’d pick up another $14K in standard deduction. So donating $100K right now would knock $46K off this year’s tax bill at the expense of paying another $36K next year in taxes. ($4K saved by the tax arbitrage, and $6K from doing the new standard deduction next year.) If we decide to give more next December (which we probably will), we just hold it until January 2019.

    But we still can’t figure out for the life of us what the point of using a DAF is. Am I missing something here? As near as I can tell, the only point of a DAF is because you want the tax break now but are either undecided on what charities to donate to or think a future donation will benefit the charity more than a donation today or want to make yourself feel good more often for donating smaller amounts more frequently over years instead of just giving it all right now.

    Am I the only anti-DAFer on the internet? Maybe I need to write a post and take on all those personal finance bloggers using DAFs and ask them which of the three reasons above they’re using a DAF for. Which one are you using it for?

    Site/Forum Owner, Emergency Physician, Blogger, and author of The White Coat Investor: A Doctor's Guide to Personal Finance and Investing
    Helping Those Who Wear The White Coat Get A "Fair Shake" on Wall Street since 2011

    #89303 Reply
    PhysicianOnFIRE PhysicianOnFIRE 
    Moderator
    Status: Physician
    Posts: 1542
    Joined: 01/08/2016

    Let’s publish a Pro / Con piece on this. We’ve almost got enough material here already; it just needs to be better organized.

     

    Tax drag is minimal if you never realize any gains. In fact, it could be negative thanks to tax loss harvesting. But it’s basically the 2% yield x 23.6%, so 0.47%.

    Click to expand…

    Don’t forget 5% UT state income tax. Now you’re up to 0.57%. If dividend yield increases even 5 or 10 percent, your tax drag will exceed the DAF fee.

     

    Why do you think that letting money sit in your DAF for a decade before giving it is better than just giving it? Who do you think is benefitting from it sitting there?

    Click to expand…

    I’ll admit it makes the most sense for someone like me who has cut back on earned income with plans to drop even further into the lower tax brackets by retiring early. Unless online income fouls up those plans (woe is me  🙂 ), I could potentially be in the 12% federal income tax bracket in two short years.

    I also think there’s a psychological benefit, particularly for the naturally frugal person who doesn’t love to part with money. You’ve read that vacation can be more enjoyable if it’s pre-paid, and you may be more likely to do things you otherwise would not have chosen to pay for a la carte. I think it’s like that with the DAF for me. I’ve got a pre-paid endowment that will allow me to donate $10K or more per year for decades based on a 4% SWR. If I had no income, I might be less inclined to give away a five-figure sum each year. But the DAF money is already out of my hands. It will be given away, and I can’t change my mind and decide to be stingy later on.

     

    If I had another $100K that I felt like I could give to charity right now, I would have already given it to charity. What’s the point of making the pit stop in the DAF? I don’t think the charity cares if it gets the money on 12/31 or 1/1. Only the IRS cares.

    Click to expand…

    That’s mostly true, but if you normally give $10,000 per year, but last year you gave $20,000, they might expect at least that much next year. They might even budget based on prior year’s donations. When they get nothing from you, that might not sit well or be unexpected. I have a feeling a lot of charities will see a dropoff from 2017 to 2018, unfortunately. Using the DAF allows you to practice “donation smoothing.”

     

    Without any charitable contributions, we wouldn’t even itemize in 2018. So we’d pick up another $14K in standard deduction. So donating $100K right now would knock $46K off this year’s tax bill at the expense of paying another $36K next year in taxes. ($4K saved by the tax arbitrage, and $6K from doing the new standard deduction next year.) If we decide to give more next December (which we probably will), we just hold it until January 2019.

    Click to expand…

    Bunching itemized deductions is a smart strategy, especially with the $24,000 standard deduction. A DAF makes that really easy. Load it up every few years, itemize that year, and give consistently to charities large and small every year.

    Without the DAF, if you want to donate $50 here and a few hundred there, you won’t see any tax benefit from those gifts in 2018 if you’re not itemizing. “That’s fine,” you might say. To which I say, if you’re willing to part with $100 to the soup kitchen, would you rather give them exactly $100 and have it cost you $100 or give $180 via the DAF at a cost to you of $100?

    The DAF will be a better giving strategy than before if we have the higher standard deduction and SALT limitations.

    We give from ours quite often. When the school sends home catalogs for our boys to sell overpriced crap to our friends and neighbors, we toss the catalogs in the recycling and donate directly to the school’s PTO instead. I don’t feel right pressuring people we know and like to buy things they don’t need and probably don’t even want. Isn’t that what MLM is for? 😉

    Cheers!

    -PoF

     

     

    40-something anesthesiologist and personal finance blogger @ https://physicianonfire.com [Part of the WCI Network] Find me on Twitter: @physicianonfire

    FIRE. Financial Independence. Retire Early.

    #90460 Reply
    Avatar AustinDoc 
    Participant
    Status: Dentist
    Posts: 4
    Joined: 12/20/2017

    But des not apply to a “salary” taken by S-Corp owners.  Only on “passive income” from the entity and no real guideline on to what the difference or expectations are (I think that is where the 20% of your profit number came from to start with) of a salary v. pass-through profit.  WHat can we justify as doctors/dentists?

    I think this is a big grey area for accountants.

    Also, I cannot see a gradient from the limit of $315,000 and up.  It is written as either you get it if you have less than $315,000 but if you make $315,001 you don’t get it.  The IRS adjusts my taxes up every other year; I can see them re-figuring your taxes a few grand and knocking you out of the 20%.

    Have you seen anything different?

    As a side note, I have $75,000 in property taxes in Texas; dentists that own two buildings and a home are screwed here.  That puts me behind the 8-ball right away.

     

    #90471 Reply
    Avatar Caligas 
    Participant
    Status: Physician
    Posts: 68
    Joined: 12/19/2017

    Ouch, are you saying that a marginal dollar of income could wipe out your entire s Corp deduction by going over 315k?

    #90477 Reply
    Avatar AustinDoc 
    Participant
    Status: Dentist
    Posts: 4
    Joined: 12/20/2017

    Any C-Corp docs out there?  Kind of old-school but maybe a better option now for those with over $315k taxable.  I know of one that has been a C-Corp for 30 years.  He made it work for him even at the higher 35%.  I own two offices but am the sole doctor.  Property taxes are going to kill me.

    Seems the average accountant is no expert on C-Crops.

     

     

     

    #90493 Reply
    The White Coat Investor The White Coat Investor 
    Keymaster
    Status: Physician
    Posts: 4601
    Joined: 05/13/2011

    Let’s publish a Pro / Con piece on this. We’ve almost got enough material here already; it just needs to be better organized.

     

    Tax drag is minimal if you never realize any gains. In fact, it could be negative thanks to tax loss harvesting. But it’s basically the 2% yield x 23.6%, so 0.47%. 

    Click to expand…

    Don’t forget 5% UT state income tax. Now you’re up to 0.57%. If dividend yield increases even 5 or 10 percent, your tax drag will exceed the DAF fee.

     

    Why do you think that letting money sit in your DAF for a decade before giving it is better than just giving it? Who do you think is benefitting from it sitting there? 

    Click to expand…

    I’ll admit it makes the most sense for someone like me who has cut back on earned income with plans to drop even further into the lower tax brackets by retiring early. Unless online income fouls up those plans (woe is me  ? ), I could potentially be in the 12% federal income tax bracket in two short years.

    I also think there’s a psychological benefit, particularly for the naturally frugal person who doesn’t love to part with money. You’ve read that vacation can be more enjoyable if it’s pre-paid, and you may be more likely to do things you otherwise would not have chosen to pay for a la carte. I think it’s like that with the DAF for me. I’ve got a pre-paid endowment that will allow me to donate $10K or more per year for decades based on a 4% SWR. If I had no income, I might be less inclined to give away a five-figure sum each year. But the DAF money is already out of my hands. It will be given away, and I can’t change my mind and decide to be stingy later on.

     

    If I had another $100K that I felt like I could give to charity right now, I would have already given it to charity. What’s the point of making the pit stop in the DAF? I don’t think the charity cares if it gets the money on 12/31 or 1/1. Only the IRS cares. 

    Click to expand…

    That’s mostly true, but if you normally give $10,000 per year, but last year you gave $20,000, they might expect at least that much next year. They might even budget based on prior year’s donations. When they get nothing from you, that might not sit well or be unexpected. I have a feeling a lot of charities will see a dropoff from 2017 to 2018, unfortunately. Using the DAF allows you to practice “donation smoothing.”

     

    Without any charitable contributions, we wouldn’t even itemize in 2018. So we’d pick up another $14K in standard deduction. So donating $100K right now would knock $46K off this year’s tax bill at the expense of paying another $36K next year in taxes. ($4K saved by the tax arbitrage, and $6K from doing the new standard deduction next year.) If we decide to give more next December (which we probably will), we just hold it until January 2019. 

    Click to expand…

    Bunching itemized deductions is a smart strategy, especially with the $24,000 standard deduction. A DAF makes that really easy. Load it up every few years, itemize that year, and give consistently to charities large and small every year.

    Without the DAF, if you want to donate $50 here and a few hundred there, you won’t see any tax benefit from those gifts in 2018 if you’re not itemizing. “That’s fine,” you might say. To which I say, if you’re willing to part with $100 to the soup kitchen, would you rather give them exactly $100 and have it cost you $100 or give $180 via the DAF at a cost to you of $100?

    The DAF will be a better giving strategy than before if we have the higher standard deduction and SALT limitations.

    We give from ours quite often. When the school sends home catalogs for our boys to sell overpriced crap to our friends and neighbors, we toss the catalogs in the recycling and donate directly to the school’s PTO instead. I don’t feel right pressuring people we know and like to buy things they don’t need and probably don’t even want. Isn’t that what MLM is for? ?

    Cheers!

    -PoF

     

     

    Click to expand…

    Okay, you’ve got a little bit of an valid argument in there about the little tiny donations. I still think it’s pretty weak. Let’s do the Pro/Con.

     

    I woke up this morning at 5 am in disbelief that I’d be taking the standard deduction in 2018 and realized that I should be trying to prepay my property taxes (actually, I should do that whether or not I take the standard deduction next year.) I think the changes to the bill just prevent you from prepaying income taxes and deduction them, not property taxes, right?

    Site/Forum Owner, Emergency Physician, Blogger, and author of The White Coat Investor: A Doctor's Guide to Personal Finance and Investing
    Helping Those Who Wear The White Coat Get A "Fair Shake" on Wall Street since 2011

    #90499 Reply
    Vagabond MD Vagabond MD 
    Participant
    Status: Physician
    Posts: 3486
    Joined: 01/21/2016

    Let’s publish a Pro / Con piece on this. We’ve almost got enough material here already; it just needs to be better organized.

     

    Tax drag is minimal if you never realize any gains. In fact, it could be negative thanks to tax loss harvesting. But it’s basically the 2% yield x 23.6%, so 0.47%. 

    Click to expand…

    Don’t forget 5% UT state income tax. Now you’re up to 0.57%. If dividend yield increases even 5 or 10 percent, your tax drag will exceed the DAF fee.

     

    Why do you think that letting money sit in your DAF for a decade before giving it is better than just giving it? Who do you think is benefitting from it sitting there? 

    Click to expand…

    I’ll admit it makes the most sense for someone like me who has cut back on earned income with plans to drop even further into the lower tax brackets by retiring early. Unless online income fouls up those plans (woe is me  ? ), I could potentially be in the 12% federal income tax bracket in two short years.

    I also think there’s a psychological benefit, particularly for the naturally frugal person who doesn’t love to part with money. You’ve read that vacation can be more enjoyable if it’s pre-paid, and you may be more likely to do things you otherwise would not have chosen to pay for a la carte. I think it’s like that with the DAF for me. I’ve got a pre-paid endowment that will allow me to donate $10K or more per year for decades based on a 4% SWR. If I had no income, I might be less inclined to give away a five-figure sum each year. But the DAF money is already out of my hands. It will be given away, and I can’t change my mind and decide to be stingy later on.

     

    If I had another $100K that I felt like I could give to charity right now, I would have already given it to charity. What’s the point of making the pit stop in the DAF? I don’t think the charity cares if it gets the money on 12/31 or 1/1. Only the IRS cares. 

    Click to expand…

    That’s mostly true, but if you normally give $10,000 per year, but last year you gave $20,000, they might expect at least that much next year. They might even budget based on prior year’s donations. When they get nothing from you, that might not sit well or be unexpected. I have a feeling a lot of charities will see a dropoff from 2017 to 2018, unfortunately. Using the DAF allows you to practice “donation smoothing.”

     

    Without any charitable contributions, we wouldn’t even itemize in 2018. So we’d pick up another $14K in standard deduction. So donating $100K right now would knock $46K off this year’s tax bill at the expense of paying another $36K next year in taxes. ($4K saved by the tax arbitrage, and $6K from doing the new standard deduction next year.) If we decide to give more next December (which we probably will), we just hold it until January 2019. 

    Click to expand…

    Bunching itemized deductions is a smart strategy, especially with the $24,000 standard deduction. A DAF makes that really easy. Load it up every few years, itemize that year, and give consistently to charities large and small every year.

    Without the DAF, if you want to donate $50 here and a few hundred there, you won’t see any tax benefit from those gifts in 2018 if you’re not itemizing. “That’s fine,” you might say. To which I say, if you’re willing to part with $100 to the soup kitchen, would you rather give them exactly $100 and have it cost you $100 or give $180 via the DAF at a cost to you of $100?

    The DAF will be a better giving strategy than before if we have the higher standard deduction and SALT limitations.

    We give from ours quite often. When the school sends home catalogs for our boys to sell overpriced crap to our friends and neighbors, we toss the catalogs in the recycling and donate directly to the school’s PTO instead. I don’t feel right pressuring people we know and like to buy things they don’t need and probably don’t even want. Isn’t that what MLM is for? ?

    Cheers!

    -PoF

     

     

    Click to expand…

    Okay, you’ve got a little bit of an valid argument in there about the little tiny donations. I still think it’s pretty weak. Let’s do the Pro/Con.

     

    I woke up this morning at 5 am in disbelief that I’d be taking the standard deduction in 2018 and realized that I should be trying to prepay my property taxes (actually, I should do that whether or not I take the standard deduction next year.) I think the changes to the bill just prevent you from prepaying income taxes and deduction them, not property taxes, right?

    Click to expand…

    Our county will not allow prepayment of personal property tax. YMMV

    #90505 Reply
    Avatar AustinDoc 
    Participant
    Status: Dentist
    Posts: 4
    Joined: 12/20/2017

    I’m saying that is how I have read it.  Seems unfair but when are taxes “fair”?

    #90506 Reply
    Liked by Caligas
    Avatar docnews 
    Participant
    Status: Physician
    Posts: 412
    Joined: 01/09/2016

    But des not apply to a “salary” taken by S-Corp owners.  Only on “passive income” from the entity and no real guideline on to what the difference or expectations are (I think that is where the 20% of your profit number came from to start with) of a salary v. pass-through profit.  WHat can we justify as doctors/dentists?

    I think this is a big grey area for accountants.

    Also, I cannot see a gradient from the limit of $315,000 and up.  It is written as either you get it if you have less than $315,000 but if you make $315,001 you don’t get it.  The IRS adjusts my taxes up every other year; I can see them re-figuring your taxes a few grand and knocking you out of the 20%.

    Have you seen anything different?

    As a side note, I have $75,000 in property taxes in Texas; dentists that own two buildings and a home are screwed here.  That puts me behind the 8-ball right away.

     

    Click to expand…

    At $315001 of taxable income you would get the same tax reduction as $315000 because the IRS rounds to dollars on figures (somehow the IRS doesn’t value the coins). Basically it phasesout over the next $100k which breaks down to decreased tax savings of 15.12 cents per dollar over $315k until at $415k its all gone.

    S corps deduction are pinned in by the lesser of 50% of the S corp W2 or 20% of all the business income or 20% of your taxable income. It’s in a sense a limiting those who are abusing the S corp to lower their FICA (medicare + social security) taxes. This works out to the W2 calculation only applying to those who put >60% distributions / <40% wages.

    #90509 Reply
    Avatar docnews 
    Participant
    Status: Physician
    Posts: 412
    Joined: 01/09/2016

    Ouch, are you saying that a marginal dollar of income could wipe out your entire s Corp deduction by going over 315k?

    Click to expand…

    No. Only if the business income is >$415k. See above.

    #90510 Reply
    Avatar Caligas 
    Participant
    Status: Physician
    Posts: 68
    Joined: 12/19/2017

    Ok, I thought he was implying that the deduction was totally eliminated for going over 315k

    #90539 Reply

Reply To: Pass Thru Deduction Explained

In case of a glitch or error, please save your text elsewhere, clear browser cache, close browser, open browser and refresh the page.

Notifications Mark all as read  |  Clear