Has anyone compared Free Tax USA to TurboTax for business filers? I've been using TurboTax for years but the price keeps creeping up every year. Now they want $170 just for the basic self-employed version before adding state filing!

I've been using Free Tax USA for my consulting business for two years now and it's been solid. One thing I'd add to what others have said - if you're worried about making mistakes, their customer support is actually pretty responsive via email. I had questions about how to handle some equipment depreciation and they got back to me within a day with clear guidance. The learning curve isn't too steep if you have your records organized. I keep a simple spreadsheet throughout the year tracking income and expenses by category, so when tax time comes I just reference that while filling out the forms. Takes me about 3 hours total now, compared to the 2-hour meeting + back-and-forth with my old CPA that cost 10x more. One heads up - make sure you understand the difference between business expenses and personal deductions before you start. The software will ask about both, but it's on you to categorize things correctly. When in doubt, err on the conservative side or do a quick Google search about what's deductible for your type of business.

just fyi, the whole "am i dependent or not" question is different from whether u can claim the credit. if ur parents provided more than half ur support (including housing!!) for the yr then ur still a dependent regardless of if ur working full-time a lot of ppl miss this. the rules r kinda complicated but basically u need to add up ALL support (housing, food, tuition, insurance, etc) and if u paid for more than 50% urself, then ur independent. if not, then ur folks can still claim u as a dependent.

You're right to be cautious about not wanting to do anything fraudulent! The key thing to understand is that the American Opportunity Credit has a lifetime limit of 4 tax years per student, regardless of who claims it. Since you graduated in May 2022 and your parents claimed the credit from 2018-2021, that's potentially all 4 years already used up. However, you'll need to verify exactly which years they actually claimed it for you. Also, just because you're working full-time doesn't automatically make you independent for tax purposes. You'll need to calculate whether you provided more than half of your own support for the entire year - and that includes the fair rental value of the housing your parents provide. If they're covering your housing costs, that could be a significant portion of your total support. I'd recommend getting copies of your parents' tax returns for those years (2018-2021) to see exactly when the AOC was claimed. If they haven't used all 4 years, and you truly qualify as independent, then you might be eligible. But given that you graduated, you also need to make sure you were enrolled in an eligible program during 2022 to claim the credit for that year.

I'm dealing with a very similar situation right now! My family's S-Corp just went through this exact issue with our accountant. What we discovered is that many accountants get confused about the ownership attribution rules and mistakenly apply the 2%+ shareholder restrictions to ALL family members, even when they have zero ownership. The key distinction is actual ownership vs. family relationship. Just because you're related to the owner doesn't automatically make you subject to the shareholder rules. Since you explicitly stated you have no ownership stake and receive a regular W-2, your health insurance premiums should be treated exactly like any other non-owner employee's. I'd suggest asking your accountant to show you the specific IRS code section they're relying on for their position. The attribution rules in IRC Section 318 only apply when determining if someone is a more-than-2% shareholder - they don't automatically disqualify family member employees from standard employee benefits if those family members don't actually own stock. Your situation sounds straightforward - you should be able to maintain the same health insurance deduction treatment you had as a C-Corp employee.

This is exactly the kind of confusion I see all the time in family businesses! Your accountant is definitely wrong here. As a zero-ownership employee, you should be treated exactly like any other W-2 employee for health insurance purposes. The 2% shareholder rules that restrict S-Corp health insurance deductions only apply to actual shareholders (and their spouses/dependents), not to family members who simply work for the company without owning stock. Since you explicitly have no ownership stake, your health insurance premiums should remain fully deductible as a business expense - just like they were when you were a C-Corp. I'd recommend getting a second opinion from a CPA who specializes in S-Corp taxation. Many accountants get tripped up by family business scenarios and incorrectly assume that ANY family relationship triggers the shareholder restrictions, but that's not how the tax code works. The key is actual ownership percentage, not family ties. Your dad (as the owner) will need to follow the special S-Corp rules for his own health insurance, but yours should be straightforward employee benefits with no special treatment required.

I've been through this exact same confusion with Schedule D and AMT calculations! What really helped me understand what was happening was realizing that the AMT system essentially creates a "shadow" tax calculation that runs alongside your regular tax return. Your tax software is doing something called "computational compliance" - it has to calculate AMT for everyone who meets certain criteria, even if you ultimately don't owe it. The confusing numbers you're seeing are likely AMT adjustments and preferences that get applied automatically based on your income type and filing status. For Schedule D specifically, even though capital gains rates are often the same under both systems, there can still be differences in how certain basis adjustments or timing items are handled. The software pulls data from various parts of your return to populate the AMT worksheet, which is why some numbers seem to appear from nowhere. One thing that gave me peace of mind was learning that FreeTaxUSA (and most major tax software) has been handling these AMT calculations for years - they're actually quite good at it because the rules are well-established, even if they're not transparent to us as users. The fact that you're seeing these calculations is actually a good sign that the software is being thorough rather than cutting corners.

I went through this exact same confusion last year! The AMT calculations in Schedule D can be really bewildering, especially when you're seeing numbers that don't seem to connect to anything you entered. What helped me was understanding that AMT (Alternative Minimum Tax) is essentially a parallel tax system. Even if you only have capital gains, the software still needs to run the AMT calculation to prove you don't owe it. This is why you're seeing Form 6251 references even though you didn't encounter it explicitly last year - it was being calculated behind the scenes. The "mystery numbers" you're seeing are likely AMT adjustments that get applied automatically based on your income sources and filing status. For example, if you have any depreciation recapture, incentive stock options, or certain other transactions, these create differences between your regular tax basis and AMT basis over time. FreeTaxUSA is generally reliable with these calculations - they've been handling AMT for years and the rules are well-established. My advice is to focus on entering your information accurately and let the software handle the complex AMT math. If you want to dig deeper, you can usually view the actual Form 6251 in the "Forms" section of your software to see the detailed calculations. Don't stress too much about understanding every single number - AMT is one of the most complex areas of tax law, and even tax professionals sometimes need to reference the rules!

This is a textbook case of employer overreach and you absolutely should not accept their retroactive "correction." I went through something very similar last year and can tell you that documentation is everything in these situations. The fact that you specifically negotiated W-2 status as a condition of employment and they agreed to it creates a binding agreement that they cannot simply void because it's now inconvenient for them. The IRS worker classification rules are based on the actual working relationship - control over your schedule, use of their equipment, following their protocols - not what saves the employer money later. If you're forced into 1099 status (which legally they cannot do retroactively for 2022), you'll need significant compensation to offset the massive shift in tax burden and lost protections. At minimum $95-100/hour to account for: - 15.3% self-employment tax (both halves of FICA) - Loss of unemployment insurance eligibility - Loss of workers' compensation coverage - Need for professional liability insurance - Quarterly tax filing and business accounting requirements Don't let them gaslight you into thinking this is a simple "correction." You negotiated in good faith, they agreed to your terms, and now they need to honor that agreement. Stand your ground and make them explain exactly what "compliance" issue requires breaking an established employment contract.

This is exactly the kind of situation that highlights why worker classification laws exist in the first place! Your employer is trying to have their cake and eat it too - they got the benefits of having you as a reliable W-2 employee when they desperately needed coverage, and now they want to retroactively shift all the tax burden and liability risks back to you. What makes this even more egregious is that you didn't just accidentally end up as a W-2 employee - you specifically negotiated this status as a condition of accepting the PRN position, and they agreed to it in writing. This creates a binding employment agreement that they cannot simply void months later because they've decided it's financially inconvenient. The IRS worker classification rules are crystal clear: it's determined by the actual working relationship (behavioral control, financial control, type of relationship), not what becomes convenient for the employer after the work has been performed. Since you're working their assigned schedules, using hospital equipment, following their protocols, and integrated into their operations, you clearly meet employee classification criteria regardless of the "PRN" designation. If they absolutely refuse to honor the original W-2 agreement (which they legally must), don't accept anything less than $100-105/hour for equivalent 1099 compensation. This needs to account for the 15.3% self-employment tax, loss of unemployment/workers' comp protection, professional liability insurance costs, and the administrative nightmare of quarterly filings and business record-keeping. My advice: Send a firm professional email referencing your documented negotiations, state you'll continue under the agreed W-2 terms, and make it clear that their policy confusion is not your problem to solve. You have the documentation and the law on your side!