One thing nobody has mentioned is that there are repayment caps based on your income! If your final income was $52,000, you're probably at 400-450% of the federal poverty level, which means the MAXIMUM you would have to repay is around $1,350 (for an individual). So even if you received more in premium tax credits than that, the repayment is capped. This is probably why your refund decreased by about $900 instead of potentially much more.

This is a really frustrating situation, but unfortunately it's how the ACA premium tax credit system works. The key thing to understand is that the system is designed around annual income projections, not your actual income at the time you had coverage. However, there are a few things that might help minimize your repayment: 1. **Make sure you're using the correct Form 8962** - You need to complete this form to reconcile your premium tax credits, and it should reflect the exact months you had marketplace coverage (Jan-June) versus employer coverage (July-Dec). 2. **Check the repayment caps** - Based on your $52,000 income, you're likely around 400% of the federal poverty level, which means there should be a cap on how much you have to repay (around $1,500 maximum). 3. **Consider the monthly allocation method** - Some tax software doesn't properly handle mid-year coverage changes. The Form 8962 allows you to allocate coverage months more precisely, which can sometimes reduce the repayment amount. The IRS notice you received is standard - they have your 1095-A form from the marketplace and need to see that you've properly reported it. Don't ignore it, as this will just create bigger problems down the road. I know it feels unfair, but this is one of the downsides of the income-based subsidy system - it can't predict mid-year job changes.

Has anyone here used a CPA for their first year filing jointly? Worth the money or overkill? My wife and I are debating whether to DIY or hire someone for our 2024 taxes.

Welcome to married filing! As someone who went through this transition a few years ago, I can add a couple practical tips to the great advice already shared: Since you got married in December, make sure you update your emergency contact and beneficiary information at work too - not just your W-4s. Also, consider opening a joint savings account specifically for tax purposes if you don't have one already. We found it helpful to have both our tax refunds/payments go to the same account so we could track our joint tax situation more easily. One thing about the mortgage interest deduction - don't forget you can also deduct property taxes paid in 2024, even if they were escrowed. Since you bought in August, you probably have 4-5 months worth. Combined with your mortgage interest, you might be closer to making itemizing worthwhile than you think. The IRS also has a really helpful online tool called the "Interactive Tax Assistant" that can walk you through scenarios specific to newly married couples. It's free and gives you personalized guidance based on your exact situation.

Has anyone dealt with partial reimbursement? My company only reimburses 80% of meals while traveling, meaning I'm covering the other 20%. Can I deduct that 20% portion?

This is a common misconception that trips up a lot of business travelers! The key principle here is that you can only deduct expenses that you actually bear the cost of. Since you were fully reimbursed by the client, you have no net out-of-pocket expense to deduct. Think of it this way - if you could deduct the $3,700 AND keep the $3,700 reimbursement, you'd essentially be getting paid to take a business trip, which isn't how the tax code works. The timing of when you fronted the money versus when you got reimbursed doesn't matter for tax purposes. What matters is that by the end of the tax year, you were made whole. Make sure to keep all your receipts and documentation of the reimbursement though - the IRS likes to see the paper trail showing these were legitimate business expenses that were properly reimbursed, especially when the amounts are significant like yours.

Has anyone used the primary residence exclusion in this type of situation? If he lived there 2 out of 5 years before the "buyout," could he exclude his portion of gain under the $250k exclusion?

This is a tricky situation but definitely manageable with proper documentation. Since your brother's name remained on the deed, he'll need to report this on his return even though he didn't receive proceeds from the 2024 sale. The key is treating the buyout as his actual "sale date" rather than the 2024 transaction. On Schedule D, report his cost basis as his original investment in the property, and his proceeds as the $15,000 he received during the buyout. Include a statement explaining that he disposed of his interest in [year of buyout] and received full compensation at that time. Make sure to keep all documentation from the original buyout agreement - this will be crucial if the IRS has questions. You'll also want to get the sale details from his ex (sale price, date, etc.) to properly complete the forms, even though his "sale" technically happened years earlier. The good news is that if he lived in the home as his primary residence for 2+ years before the buyout, he may qualify for the primary residence exclusion on any gain (though it sounds like he likely has a loss anyway). Consider consulting with a tax professional if the numbers are significant, as this type of split ownership situation can have nuances that are worth getting right the first time.

Just a heads up that different payroll systems display RSU info differently. My company (Big Tech) shows the gross RSU value, taxes withheld, and net value all clearly separated, while my husband's company uses this confusing "stock offset" term just like your wife's does. My tax software (TurboTax Premier) actually has a specific section for RSU income that helped us make sense of all this. It walks you through entering the W2 info correctly and helps verify that the RSU income is properly accounted for. Might be worth using if you're not already.

This is such a common source of confusion! I went through the exact same thing when I started getting RSUs. The key insight that finally made it click for me was realizing that your wife essentially gets paid twice for the same work - once in cash (her regular salary) and once in stock (the RSUs). The "stock offset" is just the payroll system's way of saying "we already gave you this money, but it was in the form of shares instead of cash." So when you see her gross income includes both salary and RSU value, but then the stock offset removes the RSU portion from net pay, it's because she already received that compensation as actual shares in her brokerage account. The confusing part is that the RSU income still gets taxed like regular income (which is why it shows up in gross pay), but the "payment" of that income happened via share delivery rather than cash. Your wife's total compensation is actually her net cash pay PLUS the value of shares she received, not just the net pay amount.