I'm an admin for a plumbing company and we handle this exact situation with our on-call techs. We use what's called the "commuting rule" where we only add $1.75 per one-way commute to their taxable income instead of the full lease value of the van. We also have a written policy that prohibits using the van for personal purposes (other than minimal personal stops on the way home). As long as your employer has that policy in writing and enforces it, they shouldn't be taxing you on the full value of the vehicle - just the minimal commuting value. Maybe share this with your HR or payroll department?

Based on what you've described, your employer may be incorrectly calculating your taxable benefit. Since you're required to take the van home specifically for on-call emergency response (not as a perk), and your van has permanent business modifications like built-in shelving and company logos, you likely qualify for either the "qualified nonpersonal use vehicle" exemption or at minimum the reduced "commuting rule" taxation. Under the commuting rule, you should only be taxed $1.75 each way ($3.50/day) rather than the full fair market value of the vehicle. For the qualified nonpersonal use vehicle exemption, vehicles with permanent business equipment that make personal use unlikely can be completely exempt from fringe benefit taxation. I'd recommend documenting that: 1) taking the van home is mandatory company policy for on-call techs, 2) the van has permanent business modifications, and 3) personal use is prohibited by company policy. Present this to your payroll department with references to IRS Publication 15-B sections on these specific exemptions. Your situation sounds like a textbook case for reduced or eliminated vehicle benefit taxation.

This is a great strategy! I'm in a similar situation with W2 income and side business income. One thing to keep in mind is that your Solo 401k contribution limit will be based on your net self-employment income (after expenses and self-employment tax), not the gross $27k. The calculation gets a bit tricky - you'll need to factor in half of your self-employment tax as a deduction. So if your net profit is $27k, your actual contribution limit will be somewhat less. The employee contribution portion is limited to 100% of compensation, and the employer portion is around 20% of net self-employment income after adjustments. Also, make sure to set up the Solo 401k before the end of the tax year if you want to make contributions for that year. The account needs to be established by December 31st, though you have until the tax filing deadline (plus extensions) to actually make the contributions. Rolling over your old 401ks into the Solo 401k is definitely a smart move for keeping your Backdoor Roth strategy clean. Just make sure whatever provider you choose has good investment options and reasonable fees since you'll potentially be consolidating a lot of money there.

This is exactly the kind of strategic retirement planning that can really pay off in the long run! Your approach of using the Solo 401k to keep your Traditional IRA balance at zero for clean Backdoor Roth conversions is spot on. One additional consideration I'd mention is loan provisions. Unlike Traditional IRAs, Solo 401ks allow you to take loans against your balance (up to 50% or $50,000, whichever is less). This can provide additional flexibility if you ever need access to funds before retirement age, though obviously it should be used carefully. Also, since you're consolidating multiple old 401ks, this might be a good time to review and optimize your overall asset allocation. Having everything in one place makes it much easier to rebalance and avoid overlap in your investment strategy. The fact that your current employer doesn't offer a 401k actually simplifies things significantly - you won't have to worry about coordinating contribution limits across multiple plans or dealing with the complexity of multiple plan administrators.

I'm going through the exact same thing right now with a CP81 notice for my 2023 taxes! Reading through everyone's experiences here has been incredibly helpful and reassuring. Like the original poster, I used TurboTax and was sure everything went through properly. I found my acceptance confirmation in my email (thankfully not in spam this time) with the confirmation number and filing date. Based on all the advice here, I'm planning to respond with a simple letter including my TurboTax acceptance confirmation and a copy of the CP81 notice. I'm leaning toward sending it via certified mail rather than trying to call the IRS, since the phone wait times sound brutal. One question for those who have been through this - did any of you get any kind of intermediate confirmation from the IRS that they received your response, or did you just have to wait for the final resolution letter? I'm the type who gets anxious not knowing if my mail actually made it to the right place! Thanks to everyone who shared their experiences. It's made this whole situation feel much less scary knowing that it's fairly common and typically resolves without major issues.

I went through a CP81 notice situation about 8 months ago and want to share what I learned that might help others here. The most important thing is that this notice doesn't mean you're in trouble - it's literally just the IRS saying "we can't find your return in our system, can you help us locate it?" What I found really helpful was creating a timeline of my filing process. I wrote down the date I completed my return in TurboTax, the date it was transmitted, and the acceptance date from my confirmation email. This helped me organize my thoughts and gave me confidence that I had actually filed properly. One thing that surprised me was that my state return had been processed fine, but somehow my federal return got lost in the system. So even if your state refund came through or your state taxes were processed normally, you could still get a CP81 for federal taxes. My advice: gather your TurboTax acceptance confirmation, write a brief letter explaining when you filed, and respond promptly. I sent mine via certified mail and got resolution in about 3 weeks. The key is having that electronic filing acceptance proof - it's basically undeniable evidence that you filed on time. Don't let the official government language intimidate you. This is really just a clerical issue that gets resolved once you provide proof of filing. You've got this!

Anyone else confused about what counts as "taxable" across state lines? I bought a laptop online last year and can't remember if I paid tax on it or not. Would that definitely count for use tax?

This is exactly the kind of situation that trips up so many people! Living on state lines makes tax filing way more complicated than it should be. For your grocery shopping, the good news is that many states exempt basic groceries from sales tax entirely, so you might not owe anything on those cross-border trips. But prepared foods, household items, and definitely online purchases are a different story. The key thing to remember is that use tax is really about making sure your home state gets its fair share when you buy things elsewhere. If you paid sales tax in the other state that's equal to or higher than your home state rate, you're usually good. It's only when you paid less (or nothing) that you owe the difference. Most states have made this easier by offering those lookup tables based on income that others mentioned. For someone spending $300-400/month on cross-border shopping, using the table is probably your best bet unless you made some really big purchases that would push your actual use tax way above the table amount. Don't stress too much about perfect record keeping for routine shopping - the states know this is impractical for most people, which is why they created these simplified methods.

Just want to add that if you're caring for a disabled dependent (even if not blind), you might qualify for different tax benefits like the Credit for Other Dependents or potentially even the Child Tax Credit depending on the situation. Never assume that just because there's no specific checkbox, there aren't benefits available!

This is such a great question! I work as a tax preparer and see this confusion all the time. The blindness checkbox exists because it triggers a specific additional standard deduction that was written into the tax code decades ago. But you're absolutely right that it seems arbitrary compared to other disabilities. What many people don't realize is that there are actually tons of other disability-related tax benefits scattered throughout the code - they're just not as obvious as a simple checkbox. Things like the Disabled Access Credit for business owners, various medical expense deductions, and even some lesser-known credits for specific conditions. The problem is that these benefits are buried in different sections and forms, making them much harder to find and claim. I always tell my clients with disabilities (beyond blindness) to keep detailed records of all their disability-related expenses because there are often deductions available that aren't immediately obvious from the standard forms.