I've been following this thread closely as I'm dealing with the exact same K-1 199A issue. After reading through everyone's experiences and advice, I wanted to share what finally worked for me. Like many others here, I was initially confused by the Code Z statement on my K-1 and couldn't figure out where to enter the 199A information in TurboTax. The breakthrough came when I realized I needed to treat this as a systematic process rather than trying to jump straight to the 199A entry. Here's what I did: First, I gathered ALL the paperwork that came with my K-1 - not just the main form but also the separate Section 199A statement that was attached. Then I went through TurboTax's K-1 entry process completely from Box 1 through Box 19 without skipping anything. When I got to Box 20, TurboTax asked if I had additional codes to report, I selected "Yes," entered "Z" as the code, and then the fields for the 199A amounts appeared. The key was entering the exact dollar amounts from my Section 199A statement - qualified business income, W-2 wages, and unadjusted basis of qualified property - without trying to calculate or interpret anything myself. TurboTax handled all the complex limitation calculations automatically. I can confirm that the QBI deduction doesn't show up immediately but appears later in the process when TurboTax has all your income information. In my completed return, I can see Form 8995 with the proper calculations, and my deduction ended up being about 19% of my qualified business income due to the income limitations. Thanks to everyone who shared their experiences - this thread was incredibly helpful!

I've been struggling with this exact same issue! Reading through everyone's experiences has been incredibly helpful. I have a K-1 from a consulting partnership with a Code Z statement, and I was completely lost on where to enter the 199A information in TurboTax. Based on all the advice here, I'm going to try the systematic approach: gather all my K-1 documentation (I need to double-check if there are additional pages I missed), go through the entire K-1 entry process in TurboTax from boxes 1-19, then look for the Code Z option when I get to Box 20. One question for the group - my K-1 statement mentions something about "aggregation elections" in relation to the 199A amounts. Should I be concerned about this, or is it something that TurboTax will handle automatically once I enter the Code Z data? I don't want to miss anything important that could affect my QBI deduction calculation. Thanks to everyone who shared their experiences - this thread has been more helpful than hours of searching through IRS publications!

Don't forget state tax credits too! Many states offer additional incentives for energy efficient improvements on top of the federal credits. I made the mistake of only claiming federal credits for my solar installation and missed out on about $1,000 in state credits because I filed past my state's deadline.

One thing I haven't seen mentioned yet is that you'll want to be extra careful about which improvements actually qualify for the residential energy credit versus other potential tax benefits. For example, if any of your improvements were done as part of medical necessity (like better insulation for someone with respiratory issues), you might be able to claim them as medical deductions instead, which could be more beneficial depending on your situation. Also, keep in mind that if you've already claimed depreciation on any of these improvements (if part of your home is used for business), that can affect your eligibility for the energy credits. The IRS gets picky about double-dipping on tax benefits for the same expenses. I'd definitely recommend getting all your documentation organized before filing those amended returns - receipts, manufacturer specs, installation dates, and any contractor invoices that show labor costs (since some credits include installation costs while others don't). Having everything ready upfront will make the process much smoother if the IRS has any questions.

One thing nobody has mentioned - make sure you're not deducting anything the organization reimbursed you for! Our soccer club has a process where coaches can submit receipts for equipment purchases and get reimbursed up to $150 per season. You can only deduct unreimbursed expenses, so track what you paid for personally vs what the organization covered. Also, take photos of the equipment being used at practices as additional documentation that it was for team use. The IRS loves documentation if you ever get audited!

Great question! I've been coaching youth hockey for several years and have navigated these same deduction issues. A few additional points that might help: The equipment you bought (cones, practice jerseys, pucks) is definitely deductible as charitable contributions since it's for a 501c3. Just make sure you have receipts and get written acknowledgment from the league if your total contributions exceed $250. For mileage, you can deduct trips that are specifically for coaching duties beyond normal parent activities - like equipment runs, coach meetings, or early arrival for setup. Keep a separate log for these coaching-specific miles at 14 cents per mile for 2025. The $300 volunteer credit does reduce your deductible amount - it's considered a "quid pro quo" benefit. So if you spent $400 on equipment but saved $300 in fees, you can only deduct $100. Regarding personal equipment like skates and helmets - unless they're required specifically for coaching and you wouldn't need them as a regular parent spectator, they're generally not deductible. The "primary purpose" test is key here. One tip: consider formally donating the team equipment to the organization rather than just lending it. This makes the deduction cleaner and removes any question about personal vs. charitable use. Get a donation receipt that lists the items and their fair market value.

Just wanted to add my experience since I was in almost the exact same situation last year! My income was around $98k and my husband made about $800 from a few months of part-time work. We have twin 3-year-olds. I spent way too much time researching this and even considered filing separately thinking it might help with the child tax credit. But after running the numbers (and talking to a tax professional), filing jointly was definitely the way to go. We got the full $4,000 child tax credit for both kids, plus we qualified for other benefits we would have lost filing separately. The key thing to remember is that when you're married filing jointly, it doesn't matter which spouse "claims" the child - the credit applies to your household income. Your combined income of ~$105k is well below the phase-out threshold, so you'll get the full credit either way. Save yourself the headache and file jointly! The math almost always works out better for married couples, especially when there's a big income difference like yours.

This is exactly the kind of question that trips up a lot of married couples! The good news is that with your income levels, filing jointly is almost certainly going to be your best option. When you're married filing jointly, the child tax credit isn't about which parent "claims" the child - it's based on your combined household income. At around $105k total, you're well below the $400k threshold where the credit starts to phase out, so you'll get the full $2,000 credit for your daughter. Filing separately would likely cost you money in several ways: you'd have access to smaller standard deductions, lose eligibility for various credits and deductions, and potentially push one of you into higher tax brackets. The IRS basically designed the tax code to benefit married couples who file jointly. Your husband's minimal W-2 income actually helps your overall tax situation when filing jointly - it brings down your effective tax rate compared to if you were single. I'd strongly recommend sticking with married filing jointly and claiming your daughter on that joint return. You should get the full child tax credit plus keep access to all the other married filing jointly benefits.

One often overlooked issue with PTPs is how suspended losses affect your situation when selling. If you've received K-1s with losses that were suspended due to passive activity or at-risk rules, those suspended losses become deductible when you completely dispose of your interest. But for your scenario #2 (sell and rebuy), you technically haven't fully disposed of your interest for tax purposes if you rebuy within the same year. This means those suspended losses remain suspended despite the sale transaction. For the UBTI reporting on line 20V, death transfers can be especially confusing. Technically, the UBTI character passes through to the heir, but the step-up in basis can reduce future UBTI by giving you a higher basis to offset against UBTI income.

The relationship between capital accounts and UBTI/income allocation you mentioned is spot-on, and there's actually a specific reason for this. Partnerships are required to allocate items in accordance with partners' interests in the partnership, which is primarily determined by capital account balances under Section 704(b) regulations. When your capital account becomes more negative (through distributions exceeding your basis), your economic interest in future partnership income decreases proportionally. This is why you see lower per-unit income and UBTI when capital accounts are more negative - you're essentially getting a smaller slice of the same pie. For your death scenario question, there's an important distinction many people miss: while the step-up in basis applies to the fair market value of the PTP units, it doesn't directly reset your capital account with the partnership. The partnership maintains its own records of your capital account, which continues to reflect the cumulative income, losses, and distributions. However, for tax purposes, your new stepped-up basis can significantly reduce or eliminate the taxable gain when the inherited PTPs are eventually sold. One practical tip: if you're actively trading PTPs, keep detailed records of your holding periods and corresponding K-1 amounts. The partnerships' quarterly ownership snapshots mean your K-1 might not perfectly match your actual trading activity, and you'll need to be able to support any adjustments on your return.