Has anyone seen actual text from the proposal? All I can find are news articles ABOUT the proposal but not the actual details. Would love to read the source document if anyone has it.

I've been following this discussion closely as someone who's also trying to understand these proposed changes. What strikes me is how much misinformation is circulating about this topic. From my research, the key thing people are missing is that this isn't really about "taxing 401k contributions" - it's about changing the tax incentive structure from deductions to credits. Under the current system, if you're in the 32% tax bracket, you save 32 cents per dollar contributed. Under the proposed credit system, everyone would get the same percentage benefit regardless of income level. For most middle-class earners, this would actually be a tax cut, not an increase. The "harm" only comes to high-income earners who currently get outsized tax benefits from retirement contributions. Regarding the original poster's concern about employer profit-sharing contributions - these would still be treated as pre-tax contributions that get taxed upon withdrawal, just like today. The credit system would apply to how much tax benefit you get from making those contributions, not when they're taxed. It's frustrating how complex tax policy gets distorted in the media cycle. The actual proposal is much more nuanced than "Biden wants to tax your 401k.

The substantial presence test definitely caught me off guard too when I first moved to the US! One important detail I learned the hard way - make sure you keep detailed records of your actual days in the US. The test counts any part of a day as a full day, so even if you just landed late at night or left early in the morning, those count toward your total. Since you mentioned you're from Canada, you might want to look into whether you qualify for the "closer connection exception" using Form 8840. If you maintained stronger ties to Canada (like a permanent home, family, bank accounts as your primary financial center, etc.) and were present in the US for fewer than 183 days this calendar year, you might be able to file as a non-resident even though you meet the substantial presence test. Also, don't panic about the foreign account reporting - the thresholds for FBAR and Form 8938 are different, and many people don't realize you might need both depending on your account balances. The FBAR threshold is $10,000 total across all foreign accounts at any point during the year, while Form 8938 has higher thresholds that depend on your filing status and where you live. The good news is that since you've been paying taxes through payroll, you're already on the right track and likely won't owe huge amounts when you file. The withholdings should cover most of your liability.

I'm dealing with a very similar situation right now! Just passed the substantial presence test myself after being here on an H1-B for about 7 months. The whole thing is definitely confusing at first, but it gets clearer once you understand the basics. Since you're on a work visa like me, your days definitely count toward the test (unlike students on F visas). The key thing I learned is that once you pass, you're treated as a US tax resident for the ENTIRE tax year, not just from when you arrived. This means you'll report your worldwide income on Form 1040, including any Canadian income you earned before coming to the US. For your Canadian accounts, definitely look into both FBAR and Form 8938 requirements. The FBAR deadline is October 15th (different from your regular tax return), and the penalties for missing it can be really steep. But the good news is there's an automatic extension available if you need it. One thing that helped me was creating a spreadsheet tracking all my days in the US, including arrival and departure dates. Even partial days count as full days for the test, so make sure you're counting everything correctly. The US-Canada tax treaty should help prevent you from being double-taxed on the same income, but you'll want to understand how foreign tax credits work. Don't stress too much about the payroll taxes you've already paid - those will be credited against your final tax liability when you file.

One thing I'd add is that the IRS also looks at consistency over time. If you claim 60% business use one year and then 25% the next year with no clear change in your business operations, that's a red flag that could trigger questions. I learned this the hard way when my business use percentage dropped significantly in year two because I moved closer to clients and didn't adjust my documentation strategy. The IRS noticed the inconsistency during a routine review and asked for detailed explanations about the change in usage patterns. My advice: whatever percentage you establish in year one, make sure you can maintain similar levels going forward, or document clear business reasons for any major changes. It's not just about meeting the 50% threshold - it's about showing a reasonable, consistent pattern that aligns with your actual business activities.

Something that really helped me get serious about proper vehicle documentation was realizing that the IRS has specific Publication 463 guidelines that spell out exactly what constitutes adequate records. The publication specifically states that you need written evidence created at or near the time of the expense - not reconstructed months later. What surprised me most was learning that even if you meet the 50% business use threshold, you still need to separate out commuting miles (driving from home to your regular place of business), which don't count as business miles. This caught me off guard initially because I was counting my daily office commute as business use. The good news is that once you establish a solid tracking system, it becomes pretty routine. I use a simple smartphone app that automatically starts tracking when I get in my vehicle, and I just add the business purpose when I arrive at my destination. Takes maybe 30 seconds per trip, but gives me bulletproof documentation that I'm confident would hold up in any audit situation.

I just want to echo what several others have said about documentation being absolutely critical in these family rental situations. I learned this the hard way when I got a notice from the IRS about my rental property expenses a couple years ago. What I wish I had known from the beginning is that the IRS specifically looks for whether you're operating with a "profit motive" when determining if something is truly a rental business versus personal use. When you're charging family significantly below market rate (like your sister paying only utilities plus 30% of mortgage), it's really hard to argue you have a genuine profit motive. The good news is that treating it as personal use isn't necessarily bad - you just need to be clear about what that means for your taxes. You won't report her payments as income, but you also can't deduct things like depreciation, repairs, or insurance as rental expenses. You can still claim mortgage interest and property taxes on Schedule A if you itemize. One practical tip: if you haven't already, I'd suggest drafting some kind of simple agreement with your sister that documents the arrangement. Even if it's below market rate, having something in writing that shows the terms, payment responsibilities, etc. can be helpful if questions ever come up later. It doesn't change the tax treatment, but it shows you're treating it seriously rather than just informal cost-sharing.

I've been following this thread with great interest since I'm dealing with a very similar situation with my adult daughter living in my rental property. She pays about 50% of what I could get at market rate. One thing I haven't seen mentioned yet is the potential impact on your basis and depreciation if you ever decide to sell the property. When you treat a property as personal use (which sounds like the right classification for your situation), you can't claim depreciation deductions during those years. This actually preserves more of your basis for when you eventually sell, which could be beneficial from a capital gains perspective. Also, I'd recommend keeping records of what fair market rent would be each year, even if you're not charging it. This helps establish a clear record of your decision-making process and shows you're aware of the market value. I take screenshots of comparable rentals in my area every January and keep them in my tax files. The key insight that helped me was realizing that the IRS isn't trying to penalize family arrangements - they just want to make sure people aren't artificially creating rental losses to offset other income when the property is really being used for personal/family purposes. Once I understood that perspective, the rules made a lot more sense.

Just to clarify something important - Republic Bank isn't actually sending you an IRS check. What's happening is the IRS sent your refund to Republic, then Republic takes out any fees you agreed to, and THEN Republic issues you their own check for the remaining amount. This is way different from getting a direct deposit or a check straight from the IRS. That's why when you call the IRS they'll just tell you the refund was already issued (to Republic, not to you). Republic's customer service is notoriously worse than even the IRS during tax season.

I've been through this exact situation with Republic Bank twice now. My first delayed check arrived 18 days after the issue date with no explanation. The second time, I was proactive and called Republic on day 10 - turns out their system had flagged my check for "additional verification" due to my refund amount being over $3,000. They expedited it after I provided some basic info over the phone. My advice: don't wait the full 14 business days if your refund is substantial. Call Republic directly at 866-353-1266 and ask them to check if there are any holds or flags on your account. Also, make sure your address is exactly as it appears on your tax return - even small differences can cause delays in their system.