


Ask the community...
Another option might be looking into actual investment loans which CAN be tax deductible, but with limitations. The interest is deductible up to the amount of investment income you have. So if your investments generate $2000 in income, you can only deduct $2000 in interest payments. The key is that the loan must be specifically for investment purposes, not a general personal loan.
Thanks for this alternative suggestion! Do you know if there are specific lenders that offer these investment loans? And would Treasury bonds count as investment income for this purpose? I'm wondering if the interest from the bonds would be enough to offset the loan interest deduction limit.
Most major brokerages offer margin loans or dedicated investment loans. Firms like Charles Schwab, Fidelity, and Interactive Brokers all have these options, often with better rates than personal loans since they're secured by your portfolio. Yes, the interest from Treasury bonds would count as investment income for this purpose. However, there's still a fundamental math problem with your strategy. If your investments earn 3.34% and your loan costs 3.34%, you're basically breaking even before taxes. After paying capital gains tax on the bond interest, you'd be at a loss. The interest deduction would only recover part of that loss, not create a net gain.
Instead of using loans for tax advantages, have you looked into tax-advantaged retirement accounts? Maxing out 401k's and IRAs can give you immediate tax benefits without the risk of loans. I save almost $8000 in taxes annually just by maxing these accounts.
Did you check the supplemental information that comes with the 1099-B? Sometimes Robinhood puts the crypto details in a separate section or additional pages. I had the same issue last year and found that they included all the crypto transaction details in what they call the "Consolidated 1099 Information" section rather than in the main form boxes.
Yes! I just double-checked and found it in the supplemental pages! There's a whole separate section for "Proceeds from Broker and Barter Exchange Transactions" that has all the info I need, including acquisition date and cost basis. Thanks for pointing this out - I was only looking at the first page.
Glad you found it! Robinhood's tax documents can be confusing because they combine different forms into one package. That supplemental section is actually the most important part for crypto transactions since it contains all the details you need for Form 8949. Just make sure you're using the correct acquisition dates since that determines whether it's long-term or short-term capital gains.
anyone else notice that robinhood sometimes gets the cost basis slightly wrong? i had to manually correct mine last year. check your transaction history in the app and compare it to what's on the form.
Something similar happened to my husband. His company had a policy where final paychecks are held for two weeks after the last day to make sure all equipment is returned and accounts are closed properly. His last day was Dec 27, 2023 but his final check came Jan 10, 2024. His employer explained that for tax purposes, income is counted in the year it's paid, not necessarily when it's earned. For the 1095-C, most companies continue benefits until the end of the month when you terminate, and sometimes offer COBRA for a month or two after. That's probably why your wife got the form showing coverage availability for January and February.
Thanks for sharing your experience. Did your husband just report it as 2024 income then? Did he have to provide any special documentation with your tax return to explain the situation? I'm mostly concerned about the day they're claiming she worked when she definitely didn't.
Yes, he reported it as 2024 income since that's when the payment was received. We didn't need any special documentation - we just filed according to what was on the W2. For your specific concern about the day they claimed she worked when she didn't - that's trickier. If it's just a clerical error in how they coded the final payment, it probably doesn't matter for tax purposes. But if you're concerned someone else was using her employee number, that's worth addressing with the employer directly. Ask for detailed records of that specific day they claim she worked.
I'm an accountant and see this issue constantly. Here's what's happening: 1) The $650 was probably her final paycheck from 2017 work, but it was issued in 2018, making it 2018 income for tax purposes. 2) The specific date they're claiming she worked in January is likely just their payroll system requiring an "event date" to process a payment, and someone just picked that date. 3) The 1095-C for two months is standard - companies typically extend COBRA eligibility for a period after termination. My advice: Just report the W2 as is on your 2018 taxes. The amount is small enough that trying to get a corrected W2 will be more hassle than it's worth. If you're really concerned about the January date showing work she didn't do, request your wife's complete time records from 2017-2018 to see what's actually recorded.
is there any downside to just reporting it as is? like could this cause problems with unemployment benefits or something if they think she was employed longer?
Great question. There could potentially be an impact on unemployment benefits if she filed for them immediately after leaving in December 2017. If the system shows she was employed into January 2018, that might have delayed eligibility. However, if she didn't file for unemployment, or if that period has already passed without issues, then there's likely no downside to reporting it as is. Social Security credits and other benefits are based on total annual income, not the specific timing of employment within the year.
To add to what others have said, there's one important thing to keep in mind: if your combined income is over the threshold for "substantial presence" (which changes each year), this can further complicate how the treaty benefits apply. For 2025 filing, make sure you're tracking the number of days your wife has been in the US over the past three years. That can impact whether you can claim the full $5,000 exemption under Article 20c.
Thanks for bringing this up. My wife has been in the US continuously since 2019, so I'm guessing the substantial presence test definitely applies to her. Does this mean we might not be eligible for the full exemption amount? Or just that we need to document it differently?
Since your wife has been here since 2019, she definitely meets the substantial presence test. This doesn't mean you lose the exemption - it just confirms she should be using Form 8833 rather than 8233. The good news is that Article 20c of the US-China treaty specifically allows the $5,000 exemption for students even after they become resident aliens, as long as they're still pursuing their education. So your wife should still qualify for the full exemption regardless of how long she's been here, as long as she's still a student. Just make sure to document that she's still pursuing her education when you complete Form 8833.
Heads up that there's a difference between the fellowship income and regular employment income for treaty purposes! If the fellowship is specifically for study and research, it might qualify for different treatment under Article 20 than her regular university employment.
This is a really good point. Each type of income might need to be reported separately on Form 8833. The university should have a tax advisor who specializes in international student taxation - have you tried contacting them? Most large universities have someone who deals with this all the time.
Lucy Taylor
I noticed this too and discovered that what's happening is the IRS is now pre-printing the quarter on each version of the 941. If you look at the current year forms, you'll see they have "941 for Quarter 1" or similar printed right on them. So no more checking boxes! Make sure you download the specific form for the quarter you're filing. If you're using tax software, it should automatically select the right one, but if you're downloading directly from IRS.gov, make sure to get the correct quarterly version.
0 coins
Connor Murphy
ā¢This tripped me up too! I didn't realize they changed it this way. Is this true for all the quarterly forms now or just the 941?
0 coins
Lucy Taylor
ā¢This change is primarily for Form 941, but the IRS has been moving toward more form-specific versions for several reporting requirements. Form 941-X (the amended return) still requires you to check which quarter you're correcting. Some other quarterly forms still use the traditional checkbox method, but the IRS seems to be gradually transitioning more forms to the quarter-specific model. Always best to download the most current version directly from IRS.gov or use up-to-date tax software to be sure.
0 coins
KhalilStar
Anyone know if they'll reject your form if you manage to bypass the greyed out section and put an X there anyway? I didn't realize this change and submitted one where I basically forced an X in that box. Now I'm worried.
0 coins
Amelia Dietrich
ā¢They won't reject it as long as you used the correct quarterly form. I did the same thing - printed it out and manually marked the box even though it was greyed out. The IRS agent I spoke with said it's fine because they can tell which quarter you're filing for based on the form version itself. They're just trying to phase out that manual selection to reduce errors. So you should be good!
0 coins