Be careful about hiring CPAs through random reddit recommendations. Always check their credentials and reviews online first! No offense to the person above, but there are a lot of scams out there.

Do you remember roughly how long it took for the IRS to process your amendment? I've heard horror stories about amendments taking 6+ months to process.

It took about 10 weeks for my amendment to be processed last year, which was faster than I expected. The IRS website said to allow up to 16 weeks, but mine was done sooner. Just make sure you don't make any mistakes on the form itself - double-check all your math and ensure you're using the correct tax year form. I also included a brief explanation statement that simply said "Reporting additional income from 1099-MISC that was received after original filing." Keep it simple and straightforward.

How much are the penalties typically if the IRS catches it first vs if you amend voluntarily? I'm in a similar situation but with a larger 1099 amount ($5,800) that I forgot to include.

Thanks so much for this breakdown! You're right, it's just a one-time workshop so probably easier to just fill it out. Do you know if I need to include my SIN number on the form? I'm always hesitant to share that with organizations outside Canada.

Yes, unfortunately you do need to include your SIN as your "foreign tax identifying number" on the form. I understand the hesitation, but it's a requirement for treaty benefits. If it helps ease your mind, legitimate US organizations (especially non-profits) are required to maintain confidentiality of tax identification numbers under IRS regulations. They need your SIN to properly report the payment to the IRS, so there's no way around providing it if you want the treaty benefits.

Artists also have some special provisions in the US-Canada treaty. If you're selling artwork rather than providing a service like teaching a workshop, different rules might apply. The distinction matters for tax purposes.

That's a really good point about benefits that I hadn't considered. She is on Medicaid while in nursing school, and also gets some assistance with childcare. Would claiming her as a dependent definitely affect those benefits? Is there any way to figure that out before filing? Also, how exactly do I determine if I qualify for Head of Household? I do pay more than half the household expenses, but I'm not sure if her oldest son would count as my "qualifying person" given all the complications.

Benefits eligibility varies by state, so there's no one-size-fits-all answer. Your girlfriend should contact her benefits caseworker to ask specifically how being claimed as a tax dependent might affect her Medicaid and childcare assistance. In some states, it could reduce or eliminate her eligibility, while in others it might have no impact at all. It's definitely something to check before filing. For Head of Household status, you need a "qualifying person" who lived with you more than half the year. If her oldest son can be your qualifying relative (as discussed earlier), he could potentially be your qualifying person for HOH purposes. Alternatively, if your girlfriend qualifies as your dependent, she might also qualify you for HOH. The IRS has a pretty detailed interactive tool on their website that can help you determine if you qualify - search for "IRS HOH assistant" and it should come up.

But I thought you can't claim the Child Tax Credit for a "qualifying relative" - only for a "qualifying child"? That's what my tax preparer told me last year when I was in a similar situation.

What about companies that are already cutting R&D specifically because of this tax change? I've seen several businesses in our industry reducing US-based research and moving more overseas because of this issue. Doesn't that defeat the purpose of encouraging innovation?

You're absolutely right that the tax change is having unintended consequences. I have clients who are shifting R&D to countries with more favorable tax treatment, like Canada and the UK, which offer refundable R&D tax credits on top of immediate expensing. This is exactly why there's bipartisan interest in fixing it. The original change was never about discouraging R&D - it was a revenue raiser to offset other tax cuts in the 2017 bill. Many legislators from both parties have expressed concern about the competitiveness impact. But tax policy often moves slowly, especially with divided government. Companies have to make decisions based on current law while advocating for changes. It's a challenging balance.

Great question - it varies by state. Many states use federal taxable income as their starting point, so they automatically adopt federal treatment unless they specifically decouple. California partially conforms to federal tax changes but has its own R&D credit that remains very favorable. Massachusetts has decoupled from this specific federal change, allowing immediate expensing of R&D for state tax purposes. Check with your specific states, but this is an area where you might get some relief at the state level even while the federal issue remains unresolved.