This is such a helpful thread! I'm in a similar situation and was totally confused about the EIN requirements. Just to make sure I understand correctly: I can open a Solo 401k right now as a sole proprietor using my SSN, and then I'll need to get a separate EIN specifically for the retirement plan itself (not for my business). Is that right? Also, when you all mention "Form SS-4 for banking purposes" - is that different from the SS-4 you'd file when starting a new business? I want to make sure I'm checking the right boxes when I apply for the plan EIN. One more question - if I decide to form an LLC later for liability protection, would I need to transfer the Solo 401k to the LLC or can I keep it under my original sole proprietorship structure? Some of the comments mention it depends on how the LLC is taxed but I'm still a bit unclear on the details.

This thread has been incredibly helpful! I'm actually a tax preparer and see this confusion all the time with my self-employed clients. Just wanted to confirm what everyone's been saying and add a few practical tips: You absolutely CAN open a Solo 401k as a sole proprietor with just your SSN - I help clients do this regularly. The plan EIN is totally separate and you'll apply for it after opening the account. A few things to keep in mind: - Make sure you have legitimate self-employment income (1099s, business income, etc.) - The contribution deadline is your tax filing deadline (including extensions) - You can actually contribute for 2024 up until April 15, 2025 if you haven't already - Keep good records of your contributions for tax preparation One last tip: if you're making good money as a freelancer, definitely run the numbers on a Solo 401k vs SEP-IRA. The Solo 401k almost always wins for contribution limits, but the SEP-IRA can be simpler if you ever plan to hire employees. Most of my self-employed clients without employees go with the Solo 401k for the higher limits. Good luck with your retirement planning!

Has anyone here done the Master of Science in Taxation program online? I'm looking at the ones from Northeastern and Golden Gate University but can't decide if the cost is worth it compared to just getting an EA designation.

Coming from a business management background myself, I'd recommend starting with the EA route first. It's the most direct path to tax specialization and you can begin working in the field while you decide if you want to pursue additional credentials later. The EA exam covers individual, business, and representation topics - all essential for tax strategy work. Study materials from Gleim or Becker are solid, and most people pass within 3-6 months of focused study. The credential lets you represent clients before the IRS immediately, which is huge for building credibility. Once you're working and have real experience, you can always add a CPA or pursue an MST if you want to move into more complex corporate work. But EA gets you started fastest and the knowledge directly applies to tax strategy. Plus, you'll have a better sense of which direction you want to specialize after working with actual clients. I'd also suggest volunteering for VITA (Volunteer Income Tax Assistance) programs to get hands-on experience while you're studying. It's a great way to practice what you're learning and build your resume.

Don't forget to designate your own beneficiaries for this inherited IRA right away! I learned this the hard way - if something happens to you before the account is depleted, it creates an even more complicated situation for your heirs. Just had to deal with this with my mom's inherited IRA after she passed away.

One thing I'd add that hasn't been mentioned yet - make sure you understand the "stretch" provisions that were eliminated by the SECURE Act in 2019. If you're reading older articles or getting advice from people who dealt with inherited IRAs before 2020, they might reference being able to "stretch" distributions over your lifetime, but that's no longer allowed for most beneficiaries. Also, since you mentioned discovering the account 14 months after your aunt's death, you'll want to move quickly. Even though you have flexibility in how you take distributions over the 10-year period, there are some time-sensitive actions you need to take. The inherited IRA needs to be established and titled correctly, and if your aunt had any required minimum distributions for the year she passed away that weren't taken, those need to be addressed soon to avoid penalties. I'd recommend getting the account properly set up as an inherited IRA first, then working on your distribution strategy. The clock on that 10-year period started ticking when your aunt passed away, not when you discovered the account.

I'm going through something very similar right now with my LTR 916C notice! Reading through everyone's experiences here has been so reassuring - I thought I was the only one dealing with this confusing situation. Like you, I filed injured spouse for both 2022 and 2023, got my first refund check, then received that dreaded notice saying they gave me too much. The notice was so vague about their calculation that I had no idea what went wrong. Based on all the helpful advice in this thread, I just requested my account transcript online and I'm gathering all my W-2s and pay stubs. It sounds like the most common issues are income allocation errors, dependent claiming conflicts, or problems with how tax credits were split between spouses. One thing I learned from reading everyone's responses is that you shouldn't panic about your 2023 refund yet - each tax year is processed separately. I was worried they'd automatically mess up my 2023 claim too, but it sounds like that's not necessarily the case. Don't give up! It's clear from this thread that many people have successfully challenged these incorrect calculations. The process takes time and documentation, but if their math is wrong, you can definitely get it corrected. Hang in there!

I'm so sorry you're dealing with this frustrating situation! LTR 916C notices are unfortunately common with injured spouse claims, and you're definitely not alone in this experience. Based on what you've described, it sounds like the IRS did their initial automated processing of your injured spouse claim (which got you the $700 refund), then conducted a more detailed manual review that resulted in the adjustment. This two-stage process often leads to these confusing "overpayment" notices. A few things to check that might explain the discrepancy: 1. **Income allocation errors** - Make sure your original Form 8379 correctly allocated all income between you and your husband. Even small mistakes here can significantly impact your entitled portion. 2. **Tax credit calculations** - Credits like the Earned Income Tax Credit or Child Tax Credit need to be properly split based on your respective incomes. If you have a dependent child, this could be a major factor. 3. **Dependent claiming conflicts** - Double-check that no one else (like an ex-spouse) claimed your son as a dependent, which would affect your eligibility for certain credits. I'd recommend requesting your account transcript from the IRS website to see exactly what they have on file versus what you submitted. This will help identify where the calculation went wrong. Don't give up - many people successfully challenge these determinations when the IRS makes errors!

This is actually pretty common! When your qualified and ordinary dividends match exactly like yours do at $110.42, it just means ALL your dividends qualified for the better tax treatment. You're not double-reporting anything - line 3a shows your total dividend income, and line 3b shows how much of that gets taxed at the lower capital gains rates instead of your regular income tax rate. Since all $110.42 qualifies, you put the same number in both boxes. It's actually good news - you'll pay less tax on those dividends than if they were non-qualified!

This is a great question and you're definitely not alone in being confused by this! When your qualified dividends and ordinary dividends are exactly the same amount ($110.42 in your case), it means that 100% of your dividend income qualified for the preferential tax treatment. You absolutely should put $110.42 in both line 3a and line 3b on your 1040 - you're not double-reporting or paying tax twice. Line 3a captures all your dividend income, while line 3b tells the IRS how much of that qualifies for the lower capital gains tax rates (0%, 15%, or 20%) instead of being taxed at your ordinary income rates. Since all your dividends were qualified, you get the tax benefit on the entire amount. This is actually a good position to be in!