I've tracked this closely over the last few tax seasons and here's what I've found with different companies: • Local independent preparers: Often offer advances within 24-72 hours of e-filing • H&R Block: Their "Early Refund Advance" requires IRS acceptance and typically takes 7-10 days • TurboTax: Their "Refund Advance" usually takes 8-15 days as they wait for IRS approval • Jackson Hewitt: Their "No Fee Refund Advance" is available within 24 hours of e-filing but has stricter eligibility The faster the advance, the more risk for the lender, so they either: • Charge higher preparation fees to offset risk • Have stricter eligibility requirements • Offer lower advance amounts • Add hidden fees elsewhere Just be careful - some of these "advances" can end up costing you more than just waiting for the IRS direct deposit!

As someone who's dealt with this exact confusion, I can tell you that timing really depends on your specific situation and what kind of advance product you're looking at. The key thing to understand is that there are basically two types of refund advances: 1. **Early advances** (24-48 hours): These are based on your filed return passing basic IRS validation checks. Your local preparer probably offered this type - they're taking more risk but can get you money faster. 2. **Standard advances** (1-3 weeks): These wait for full IRS processing and approval of your refund amount. This is what most major chains like H&R Block and TurboTax offer. Since you mentioned caregiving expenses piling up, I'd suggest comparing the total cost (prep fees + advance fees) versus just waiting the extra couple weeks for your actual refund. Sometimes the "convenience" of getting money early ends up costing $50-100+ in various fees. Also, if you do go the advance route, make sure to read ALL the fine print about fees. Some preparers are sneaky about bundling costs into their "tax preparation fee" to make the advance look "free" when it's really not.

Can I just say how frustrating it is that most tax preparers don't understand trading scenarios? I had a similar situation with wash sales and my CPA kept giving me wrong information. Had to educate myself and basically explain it to him. The IRS rules aren't even that complicated once you understand the principle - wash sale losses aren't disallowed forever, they're just deferred by adjusting the basis of replacement shares.

This is exactly why I switched from my general CPA to someone who specializes in trader taxation. The difference in understanding was incredible - my new preparer immediately knew that wash sales defer losses rather than eliminate them permanently. One thing that helped me verify my understanding was looking at my 1099-B more carefully. In Box 1d, if there's a "W" code, that indicates wash sale adjustments were made. But the key is looking at the summary totals - your broker has already calculated your net gains/losses after all wash sale adjustments. Your tax preparer should be using those final adjusted numbers, not trying to manually disallow wash sale losses again. If he's doing that, he's essentially double-counting the wash sale penalty, which would be incorrect. I'd recommend getting a second opinion from a CPA who specializes in securities transactions. The rules really aren't that complex once someone explains them properly, but unfortunately many general tax preparers just don't encounter these situations often enough to understand the nuances.

Wow, reading through all these responses has been incredibly educational! As someone who recently went through a similar inheritance situation, I can't stress enough how important it is to act quickly on this. I inherited my grandmother's IRA in 2021 and made the mistake of assuming I had 10 years to figure it out. Turns out she had already started RMDs, which meant I needed to continue taking annual distributions during the 10-year period. I missed two years of required distributions before realizing my error. The penalty relief process that others have mentioned really does work. I filed Form 5329 for the missed years, marked "RC" for reasonable cause, and included a letter explaining how the SECURE Act changes created confusion about the requirements. The IRS accepted my explanation and waived the penalties completely. For your letter, keep it straightforward - explain that the SECURE Act created new rules for inherited IRAs, that professional guidance was inconsistent or unavailable, and that you're now taking corrective action as soon as you understood the requirements. Include dates and reference the specific confusion around inherited IRA RMD rules. Don't let your dad's advisor's reluctance to help discourage you. Many advisors are still learning these rules themselves. The custodian route that others mentioned is definitely worth trying first - they deal with this daily and can give you the exact numbers you need.

Reading through all these responses, I'm struck by how many people are dealing with similar inherited IRA confusion. The SECURE Act really did create a perfect storm of complexity, especially for situations like yours with double-inherited accounts. One thing I haven't seen mentioned yet is that you should also check if your dad's IRA accounts had any beneficiary designations that might affect your situation. Sometimes when people inherit IRAs, there can be contingent beneficiaries listed that could complicate things further. Also, while everyone's focusing on the penalty relief (which is definitely important), don't forget about the tax planning aspect. Since you have until 2032 to empty both accounts, you might want to spread the distributions across multiple tax years to avoid pushing yourself into higher tax brackets. This is where a good tax professional becomes really valuable - not just for handling the penalties, but for creating a withdrawal strategy that minimizes your overall tax burden. The fact that your dad's advisor is being evasive is unfortunately common. Many advisors are overwhelmed by the SECURE Act changes and would rather punt to someone else than risk giving incorrect advice. Don't take it personally - just keep looking for someone who specializes in this area. You've got options here, and with the penalty relief available for SECURE Act confusion, this situation is definitely fixable. The key is acting soon rather than continuing to wait.

I want to add another perspective that might help clarify this situation. As someone who works in tax preparation and sees these scenarios regularly, the confusion between economic loss and tax loss is extremely common with partnership investments. When you invest in a partnership or fund, you're essentially becoming a fractional owner of that entity's business activities. If that partnership trades section 1256 contracts (like certain index futures, forex contracts, or broad-based index options), any gains or losses from those trades get allocated to partners based on their ownership percentage. The $245 loss on your K-1 isn't "phantom" or artificial - it represents real trading losses that occurred within the partnership. You didn't see this money leave your personal account because the partnership conducted this trading with its own capital, but as a partner, you're entitled to your share of both the profits and losses for tax purposes. This is actually beneficial tax policy because it prevents double taxation and ensures that investment losses flow through to the actual economic owners. Your total tax loss of $845 accurately reflects your combined personal trading activity ($600) plus your proportional share of the partnership's section 1256 contract losses ($245). The key takeaway is that partnership taxation looks at economic substance rather than just cash flow in your personal account. Both losses are legitimate and should be reported as your tax preparer indicated.

I've been following this thread with great interest because I had almost the exact same situation last year with my volatility trading and K-1 reporting. Like you, I was really confused when my tax documents showed losses that didn't match my actual account balance. What finally helped me understand it was realizing that when you invest in certain funds or partnerships, you're not just getting exposure to their investment returns - you're actually becoming a partner in their business activities. So when that partnership trades section 1256 contracts (which get special tax treatment), you get allocated your proportional share of those gains and losses even though the actual trading happened at the partnership level with their capital, not yours. The $245 on your K-1 represents real economic losses from section 1256 contract trading that occurred within the partnership you invested in. Since you're a partner, those losses flow through to your personal tax return. Your personal $600 SVIX loss is completely separate - that's from your direct trading activity. Your tax preparer is absolutely right about claiming both losses. The total $845 represents your legitimate tax losses for the year: $600 from your personal trading plus $245 as your allocated share of the partnership's section 1256 contract losses. Even though only $600 left your bank account, you're entitled to claim both because they represent different economic activities you participated in. The section 1256 contracts also get that special 60/40 tax treatment on Form 6781, which is why they can't just be combined with your regular capital losses on Schedule D.

This is a complex situation that really benefits from getting proper professional guidance. Based on what others have shared here, it sounds like the consensus is to: 1. Transfer funds from dissolved LLC to your personal account as a final distribution 2. Then contribute those funds to your new LLC as capital But I'd strongly recommend documenting everything thoroughly. Keep records showing the old LLC was properly wound down, all obligations were met, and the distribution was legitimate. Also make sure you understand your basis in the old LLC to avoid any unexpected tax consequences. Given the amount involved ($95K), this isn't something I'd wing it on. Whether you use one of the services mentioned here or work with a local CPA, having someone review your specific situation and state requirements seems worth the cost to avoid potential issues down the road.

This thread has been incredibly helpful! I'm in a similar situation with a dissolved LLC but with only about $15K involved. Reading through all these responses, it seems like the key takeaways are: 1. Don't transfer directly between the old and new LLC 2. Move funds to personal account first as a final distribution 3. Then contribute to new LLC as capital 4. Document everything properly 5. Consider state-specific creditor notification requirements 6. Watch out for basis issues that could create taxable events One question I haven't seen addressed - does the timing matter? Like, should there be a waiting period between when you take the final distribution and when you contribute to the new LLC? Or can these happen back-to-back as long as they're documented as separate transactions? Also wondering if anyone knows whether the bank cares about this process. When I transfer the money to my personal account, do I need to provide any explanation to the bank about why I'm closing the business account, or do they just process it like any other transfer?