Anyone know if the 2025 tax law changes will affect this at all? I heard some suspended deductions are coming back.

I went through something very similar last year and ended up working with a tax attorney who specializes in employment-related legal expenses. One thing that really helped my case was documenting exactly how the harassment was impacting my work performance and income potential. The key distinction the attorney explained is whether the legal fees were incurred to protect your ability to earn income versus just for personal protection. In my case, I had to show that the restraining order was necessary to maintain my employment and earning capacity, not just for general safety. We ended up being able to deduct about 60% of the legal fees on my California return by arguing they were directly related to income production. The documentation was crucial - I had emails showing how the harassment was affecting my work, performance reviews that mentioned the impact, and even some lost client interactions due to the situation. Worth noting that California's rules are more favorable than federal right now, so definitely explore both angles if you're in CA. The investment in getting proper tax advice paid for itself in my case.

I know this is a little different from the original question, but I wanted to add that you should also check if your son qualifies for the Premium Tax Credit if he purchased his insurance through the Marketplace. This could be MORE valuable than the self-employed health insurance deduction in some cases, but you have to choose one or the other. Definitely run the numbers both ways - sometimes the PTC is better, especially for lower income levels. But if his 1099 income is substantial, the self-employed health insurance deduction might be better since it reduces both income tax AND self-employment tax.

One thing nobody mentioned - if your son is under 27, could you possibly cover him under YOUR health insurance instead? Might be cheaper than what he's paying, and then this whole deduction issue becomes moot. Just a thought!

I messed up my rental condo depreciation last year using the town's weird assessment numbers. My accountant caught it before filing and said the 0.4% land allocation I calculated would absolutely trigger an audit. She helped me get the correct numbers from our condo docs (it was actually 16%). One thing nobody mentioned - with condos you're depreciating the interior structure plus your percentage interest in common elements, but NOT the land. That's why the allocation is so important. My accountant said this is one of the most common errors for first-time landlords with condos.

This is exactly the kind of situation where getting professional help upfront saves you headaches later. I made similar mistakes with my first rental property and learned the hard way that municipal assessments are often completely unreliable for depreciation purposes. Your 0.35% land allocation is definitely a red flag. Even for condos, anything under 10% typically raises eyebrows. The IRS expects reasonable allocations, and yours is so far outside normal ranges that it could trigger automatic review. Here's what I'd recommend based on my experience: 1) Check your original purchase documents - sometimes the land/building split is mentioned in the settlement statement or appraisal 2) Contact your condo association for official documentation of the land allocation percentage 3) If neither yields results, use a conservative 15-20% allocation and document your reasoning Remember, you're not just depreciating your unit - you're also depreciating your proportional share of common areas (hallways, lobby, etc.) but excluding the land value. Using $720k as your basis is correct regardless of current value. Better to be slightly conservative with your depreciation than to deal with an audit over unrealistic numbers!

My sister dealt with this exact situation! Her husband was in the Philippines while she was in the US with their son. The IRS actually flagged her return for review when she filed as Head of Household because they had record of her marriage from the I-130 petition. She had to provide extra documentation showing she qualified as "considered unmarried" for tax purposes. Just something to be aware of!

This is such a stressful situation, but you're definitely not alone in dealing with this confusion! Based on what you've described, you have a few paths forward: Since your husband is living abroad and you're supporting your daughter, you might actually qualify for Head of Household if you can demonstrate that you're "considered unmarried" for tax purposes. This requires living apart from your spouse for the last 6 months of the tax year and paying more than half the costs of maintaining your home. However, given the complexity with the I-130 petition and potential IRS scrutiny (as others have mentioned), Married Filing Separately might be the safer route to avoid any flags or requests for additional documentation. For the address issue with your husband's country not using postal codes - you can write "Foreign" in the ZIP code field or use "00000" as many tax software programs require something in that field. Definitely amend last year's return from Single to the correct status. The IRS is pretty understanding about honest mistakes, especially in complex immigration situations like yours. Have you considered consulting with a tax professional who specializes in international tax situations? They might be able to run the numbers both ways (HOH vs MFS) to see which gives you the better outcome while minimizing audit risk. Hang in there - tax season is stressful enough without immigration complications!

If your return was accepted but now says "we may need more information," check if you claimed any of these credits, as they often trigger additional review: - Earned Income Tax Credit - Child Tax Credit - American Opportunity Credit - Premium Tax Credit (for health insurance) My return was held up last year because of EITC verification. Took almost 8 weeks total but eventually processed without me needing to do anything.

I'm going through almost the exact same situation! Filed through FreeTaxUSA about 5 weeks ago, got the initial acceptance, then that dreaded "we may need more information" message appeared. Haven't received any mail yet either. Reading through these comments has been incredibly helpful - I had no idea about the identity verification delays when switching from a professional preparer to self-filing. That's probably exactly what's happening since we used H&R Block last year. The 21-30 day processing time Brandon mentioned gives me some peace of mind that we're still within normal range, even if it feels like forever when you're counting on that refund. Going to check out that Treasury Offset Program number Axel mentioned just to rule out any debt issues, and might try the taxr.ai tool if we don't hear anything in another week or two. Thanks everyone for sharing your experiences - makes me feel a lot less alone in this waiting game!