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.

Has anyone here dealt with the "partial business use" angle successfully? I had a dedicated home office (about 10% of square footage) in a house I sold at a loss last year, and my tax preparer said the loss for that portion might be deductible as a business loss rather than a personal residence loss.

I'm really sorry to hear about your situation - losing $340k on a home sale is devastating, especially when it was due to circumstances beyond your control. From what I understand about your case, the core issue is that losses on personal residences aren't deductible, even when the sale is forced by job relocation. However, there are a few angles worth exploring that others have touched on: 1. **Home office deduction**: If you used any part of your home exclusively for business purposes and claimed home office deductions in previous years, that portion of the loss might be treated as a business loss rather than personal. 2. **Energy-efficient improvements**: Some of your $800k in renovations might qualify for separate tax credits if they included energy-efficient upgrades (solar, HVAC, windows, etc.). 3. **Documentation review**: Make sure all renovation costs are properly included in your cost basis calculation. While this won't help with the loss deduction, it ensures your loss calculation is accurate. Given the complexity and the substantial amount involved, I'd strongly recommend getting professional guidance - either from a CPA who specializes in real estate transactions or directly from the IRS. Some of the tools and services mentioned in this thread might help you identify overlooked opportunities or get clearer answers about your specific situation. The financial hit is painful enough without wondering if you missed any legitimate tax relief options.

Adding to what others have shared - I'm a CPA and deal with EIN applications regularly for my clients. The missing date really isn't going to be an issue for processing. The IRS SS4 form has evolved over the years, and while the date field exists, it's not one of the critical validation points they use. The most important elements they look for are: complete business information, proper entity type selection, valid responsible party details, and that signature. Your application will almost certainly process normally. That said, if you're concerned about timing (especially since you mentioned needing it for a bank account), I'd suggest calling the IRS in about 2-3 weeks to check status rather than immediately resubmitting. Duplicate applications can sometimes cause more delays than missing dates. One pro tip for the future - if you ever need to submit tax forms again, consider reviewing them the next day with fresh eyes before sending. I catch way more errors that way than trying to proof everything in one sitting. Good luck with your new business venture!

I totally understand the panic you're feeling! I went through something similar when I was setting up my consulting business last year. I actually made an even more embarrassing mistake - I accidentally wrote my personal SSN instead of leaving it blank for the business entity section and didn't catch it until after I'd already faxed it. From what I've learned through that experience and talking to other small business owners, the IRS is surprisingly forgiving with these kinds of administrative oversights on SS4 forms. The date field, while included on the form, isn't one of the critical elements that would cause an automatic rejection. The key things they really care about are having a complete signature, accurate business information, and proper entity classification. As long as you've got those covered (which it sounds like you do), you should be in good shape. My recommendation would be to wait about 2-3 weeks and then call to check on the status rather than immediately resubmitting. That way you can confirm they received it and are processing it normally. If for some reason there is an issue, they can guide you on the best way to handle it at that point. Don't beat yourself up too much about this - these forms can be tricky even when you're being super careful. The fact that you triple-checked everything else shows you were being thorough. Best of luck with your new side business!

One important thing no one mentioned - once you get your ITIN, you should also fill out a W-8BEN form to give to TikTok. This establishes your status as a foreign person and may reduce the withholding tax rate depending on tax treaties between the US and Australia. Without a W-8BEN, TikTok will likely withhold 30% of your earnings for US taxes. With the form (and depending on the Australia-US tax treaty), you might qualify for a lower rate like 10-15%.

As someone who went through this exact process for my YouTube channel earnings, I can confirm that getting an ITIN as a non-US creator is definitely doable but requires patience and attention to detail. A few additional tips based on my experience: 1. **Start early** - The 7-11 week processing time is real, and it can be longer during peak tax season (January-April). Since you're already accepted into TikTok's program, apply ASAP. 2. **Document everything** - Keep copies of everything you submit. I had to follow up on my application status and having reference numbers and copies made that much easier. 3. **Double-check your W-7** - Small mistakes can cause rejections and months of delays. Pay special attention to the reason codes and make sure your supporting documents exactly match what's required for your situation. 4. **Consider the tax implications** - Once you have your ITIN and start earning, you'll likely need to file annual US tax returns (Form 1040NR) to claim any treaty benefits or refunds from overwithholding. The good news is that once you have your ITIN, it's valid indefinitely as long as you use it on a tax return at least once every three years. So this is a one-time hassle that will serve you for your entire creator career!

As someone who works in tax policy analysis, I can tell you that eliminating income tax for those earning under $150k would require replacing roughly $800 billion to $1 trillion in annual revenue. The proposals I've seen typically involve either dramatically higher rates on upper earners (think 60%+ marginal rates) or implementing a federal VAT around 15-20%. The political reality is that both approaches face enormous obstacles. High earners and businesses would strongly oppose massive rate increases, while consumers would resist a large VAT that makes everything more expensive. European countries with high VAT rates built those systems gradually over decades. Your best bet for actual tax relief is probably targeted expansions of existing credits like the Child Tax Credit or Earned Income Tax Credit, which provide relief without completely restructuring the entire system. These have a much higher probability of actually happening since they're incremental changes rather than revolutionary ones.

This is such an important discussion for middle-class families! I've been following tax policy debates closely and the reality is that while these dramatic proposals get a lot of attention during election cycles, the incremental changes are what actually move the needle for most of us. What I find frustrating is how these big "eliminate taxes for everyone under $150k" headlines distract from more realistic reforms that could genuinely help. Things like increasing the standard deduction, expanding tax credits for childcare expenses, or simplifying the tax code so we don't all need expensive software or accountants just to file correctly. The math that others have shared here really puts it in perspective - we're talking about replacing nearly half of all federal revenue. Even if that were politically possible, the replacement mechanisms (whether higher rates on the wealthy, VAT, or whatever) would likely end up costing middle-class families in other ways. I'd rather see politicians focus on achievable reforms that actually have a shot at becoming law rather than these pie-in-the-sky promises that just generate headlines but never deliver real relief for working families.