I just wanted to share my experience from last year to help set expectations. I filed my extended return by mail in July and it took exactly 11 weeks to get my refund. The most frustrating part was that the "Where's My Refund" tool didn't update at all until week 9, then suddenly showed "approved" and I had the money within 3 days. For what it's worth, I called the IRS around week 8 (waited 2.5 hours on hold) and the agent confirmed they had received my return but said it was in the "normal processing queue" with no way to expedite. She told me paper returns were taking 10-16 weeks at that time due to backlogs. Since you mailed yours in mid-June, you're probably looking at late August or early September based on current processing times. I know it's tough when you're counting on that money, but hang in there - it will come! The IRS transcript tip mentioned above is definitely worth checking too.

I'm dealing with the exact same situation - filed my extended return by mail in late June and it's been radio silence from the IRS ever since. This thread has been incredibly helpful! I had no idea about the IRS account transcript option, that's definitely something I'm going to check today. The processing timeline estimates people are sharing (6-16 weeks for paper returns) are both reassuring and nerve-wracking at the same time. At least now I know what to expect instead of just wondering if my return got lost in the mail somewhere. Has anyone here had experience with amended returns after using those analysis tools mentioned? I'm wondering if it's worth double-checking my return for missed deductions while I'm waiting anyway. Might as well make the most of this frustrating wait time!

I've been following this discussion and wanted to share another perspective on your asset protection strategy. While everyone's focused on the HSA mechanics, have you considered whether this level of separation is actually necessary under your state's laws? Many states have "transmutation" doctrines where separate property can become marital property if it's commingled, but they also recognize that passive appreciation of separate property remains separate as long as it's properly documented. The key is usually having clear records of the pre-marital value and showing that any growth was due to market forces rather than marital contributions or active management. Before going through complex tracking systems or service fees, you might want to consult with a family law attorney in your state about whether your current HSA structure already provides adequate protection. In some jurisdictions, simply having documentation of your account balance on your wedding date (like a statement) might be sufficient to protect the pre-marital portion, even if the growth occurs in the same account. The rollover approach mentioned by Clay is probably the simplest and most cost-effective solution if you do need clearer separation - it creates an official paper trail without ongoing fees or complex tracking requirements.

Just wanted to add another data point to this discussion. I went through a similar situation last year when I got engaged and was concerned about keeping my HSA assets separate. After reading through all the advice here, I ended up doing the simple rollover approach that Clay and StarStrider mentioned. I transferred my entire HSA balance to a different provider about a month before my wedding. This created a clear paper trail showing the exact value of my pre-marital HSA assets. The process was straightforward - no tax implications since it was a direct trustee-to-trustee transfer, and it took about 2 weeks to complete. My family law attorney confirmed that this documentation would be more than sufficient in our state to establish the pre-marital character of those assets. Any growth after the wedding date is technically marital property, but the original balance plus its proportional share of growth can be traced back to separate property. Much simpler than trying to open a second HSA (which as others confirmed, you can't do without HDHP coverage) or paying for ongoing tracking services. Sometimes the simple solutions really are the best ones.

Has anyone else noticed that a lot of accountants seem confused about S corp basis calculations? I've had three different CPAs give me three different answers about how to handle distributions when we've had prior losses.

I'd definitely recommend getting a second opinion on this. Based on what you've described, it sounds like your tax preparer might be misunderstanding something about your situation. The key issue is tracking your basis correctly. Your basis in the S corp stock starts with your initial investment, gets reduced by your share of losses, gets reduced by distributions you receive, and gets increased by additional capital contributions or your share of income. If you made additional capital contributions during 2024 (like the $75K you mentioned in another comment), those should increase your basis and likely eliminate any capital gains treatment on your distributions. Make sure your tax preparer has accounted for all capital contributions, not just your original investment. Also, if you've made any loans to the S corp (even informal ones where you paid business expenses out of pocket), those create "debt basis" which can help absorb losses and avoid capital gains on distributions. I'd suggest asking your tax preparer to show you the specific basis calculation they're using. They should be able to walk through: starting basis + capital contributions + income - losses - distributions = ending basis. If that number goes negative, only the negative portion would be capital gains. Don't just accept their conclusion without understanding the math behind it - this is a common area where even experienced preparers make mistakes.

Just to add another perspective as a green card holder who went through this - don't forget about state tax implications too! Some states have their own foreign asset reporting requirements that are separate from federal forms. I bought a small apartment in Europe a few years ago and while I handled the federal Form 8938 correctly, I almost missed that my state (California) had additional disclosure requirements for foreign investments. Each state is different, so definitely check with your state's tax authority or a tax professional familiar with your specific state's rules. Also, keep really good records of the purchase price, any improvements you make, and the exchange rates on all transaction dates. If you ever sell the property, you'll need all this for calculating capital gains/losses on your US return. The IRS documentation requirements for foreign property transactions are pretty strict.

As someone who recently went through this exact situation as a green card holder, I can confirm that yes, you'll likely need to report the foreign property purchase even if it's just for personal use. The key thing to understand is that the US taxes based on your tax residency status (which includes green card holders), not just where the property is located. Here's what I learned from my experience: If the property value exceeds the Form 8938 thresholds ($50,000 for single filers living in the US), you'll need to report it. Even if it's below that threshold, it's smart to keep detailed documentation of the purchase price, transaction dates, and exchange rates used - you'll thank yourself later if you ever sell or if thresholds change. One practical tip: when you're ready to make the purchase, consider consulting with a tax professional who specializes in expat/green card holder situations before completing the transaction. They can help you structure things properly from the start and avoid any compliance headaches later. The reporting requirements can seem overwhelming at first, but once you understand what applies to your specific situation, it becomes much more manageable. Also, don't forget to factor in any foreign bank accounts you might need to open for the property - those could trigger separate FBAR reporting requirements if they exceed $10,000 at any point during the year.

This is absolutely a red flag and you're right to be concerned. I work in banking compliance and can tell you that sharing login credentials violates virtually every bank's terms of service - if fraud occurs, your dad could be held liable since he willingly shared his access. The accountant's refusal to provide her SSN for read-only access is particularly suspicious. Licensed accountants routinely provide their SSN for client verification - it's standard practice. Her avoidance of this suggests she either isn't properly licensed or is trying to avoid creating an audit trail. Your dad should immediately: 1. Change his banking passwords 2. Set up read-only access through the bank's proper channels 3. If she still refuses, find a new accountant There are legitimate accounting software solutions that provide secure access without compromising bank credentials. Any accountant who insists on full login access in 2025 is either incompetent or potentially fraudulent. Trust your instincts on this one.

As someone who works in financial fraud prevention, I can't stress enough how dangerous this situation is. Your dad's accountant is essentially asking for the keys to his financial kingdom, and her refusal to go through proper channels is a massive red flag. I've seen this exact scenario play out dozens of times - it usually starts with "just need access for bookkeeping" and ends with missing funds and a devastated business owner. The fact that she won't provide her SSN for legitimate read-only access tells you everything you need to know about her intentions. Here's what I'd recommend: Have your dad call his bank directly and ask them to walk through the proper accountant access options. Most banks have secure portals specifically designed for this purpose. If she still refuses these legitimate channels, that's your answer - find a new accountant immediately. Don't let your dad's trust override basic security practices. A legitimate accountant will understand and appreciate clients who insist on proper procedures. The sketchy ones will make excuses and push back, which is exactly what's happening here.