


Ask the community...
This is such a helpful thread! I'm actually dealing with a similar situation - I live in Florida (no state income tax) but just started working remotely for a company based in New York. My employer has been withholding NY state taxes from my paycheck, but I'm wondering if that's correct since I'm physically working from my home office in Florida. From what I'm reading here, it sounds like I should only owe taxes to the state where I'm physically performing the work (Florida), which has no income tax. Should I be asking my employer to stop the NY withholding, or am I missing something about how remote work taxation works when the employer is in a different state than the employee? Has anyone else dealt with a remote work situation like this where the employer automatically withholds for their state even though you're working from a different state?
You're absolutely right to question this! If you're working 100% remotely from your Florida home office, you should NOT owe New York state income taxes, and your employer should not be withholding NY taxes from your paycheck. New York only taxes income earned within the state (with some limited exceptions for NY residents working elsewhere). You should definitely contact your payroll/HR department immediately to correct this. They may not be familiar with remote work tax rules and are probably just defaulting to withholding for their state. You'll want to file a Form IT-2104 (Employee's Withholding Allowance Certificate) with your employer to stop the NY withholding. If they've already withheld NY taxes, you'll need to file a NY non-resident return to get those taxes refunded, since you don't actually owe them. Keep good records showing that you work exclusively from your Florida home office in case you need to prove your work location. This is becoming a more common issue with remote work - many employers' payroll systems aren't set up to handle employees working from different states than where the company is located.
I've been dealing with a similar cross-border tax situation for the past two years (living in Delaware, working in Pennsylvania), and I wanted to share a few additional tips that have helped me: 1) **Keep detailed records**: I maintain a simple spreadsheet tracking every day I work in PA vs. DE (for those occasional work-from-home days). This has been invaluable when filing my non-resident PA return. 2) **Check your pay stubs regularly**: My employer initially wasn't withholding PA taxes correctly, and I caught it early thanks to monitoring my pay stubs. It's much easier to fix withholding issues during the year than to deal with a large tax bill at filing time. 3) **Consider estimated tax payments**: If your employer isn't withholding enough for the work state, you might need to make quarterly estimated payments to avoid penalties. I learned this the hard way my first year! 4) **Don't forget about local taxes**: Some cities and counties also have their own income taxes that apply to non-residents who work there. Philadelphia, for example, has a wage tax that applies even to non-residents. The good news is that once you get the system figured out, it becomes pretty routine. And since you're living in a no-tax state, you really are only dealing with one state's tax return, which simplifies things considerably compared to those dealing with two tax states.
This is incredibly helpful, especially the tip about local taxes! I had no idea that cities could have their own income taxes for non-residents. That's definitely something I need to look into for my Washington/Oregon situation - I wonder if Portland has any local taxes that would apply to me as a non-resident worker. The spreadsheet idea is brilliant too. I've been trying to keep track mentally, but having a formal record would definitely be better for tax time. Do you include things like sick days or vacation days taken while you were supposed to be working in PA, or just the actual days you physically worked there? Also, thanks for the reminder about estimated payments. Since I'm new to this cross-border situation, I hadn't even thought about whether my employer's withholding would be sufficient. I should probably check that sooner rather than later!
Just wanted to add my experience here - I had the exact same issue two years ago with my middle initial being wrong on my return (used "J" instead of "G"). I was worried sick about it, but it turned out to be no big deal at all. I called the IRS directly (yes, it took forever to get through) and the agent told me that as long as the SSN matched, they could process the return without any issues. She made a notation in my file about the correct spelling and said I didn't need to file an amendment unless I wanted to for my own records. The key thing is that your SSN is correct - that's really what they use to match everything up in their system. Your refund (if you're getting one) should process normally, and you won't have any problems with future returns as long as you make sure the name is spelled correctly going forward. One tip: if you do want to get it officially corrected, I'd recommend calling rather than filing a 1040-X. It's faster and saves you the paperwork. Just be prepared for a long wait time on the phone!
Thanks for sharing your experience! It's really reassuring to hear from someone who went through the exact same thing. I'm feeling much better about this whole situation now. I think I'll try calling the IRS first like you suggested, especially since multiple people here have confirmed that's often the fastest route for simple corrections like this. The wait times sound brutal, but at least I know what to expect now. Appreciate everyone's help on this thread!
I work as a tax preparer and see name spelling errors pretty frequently - you're definitely not alone in this situation! The good news is that minor name discrepancies like yours (especially just one letter difference) rarely cause any processing issues with the IRS. Since your SSN is correct, your return should process normally. The IRS computer systems primarily match on SSN, not name spelling. However, I always recommend my clients get these corrected for their records. Here's what I typically advise: First, try calling the IRS at 1-800-829-1040 to see if they can make a simple notation in your file (as others have mentioned, this is often the fastest solution). If you can't get through or prefer the paper trail, you can file Form 1040-X, but honestly for just a name correction, the phone call is usually sufficient. Also, double-check that your name is spelled correctly on your Social Security card - sometimes people discover the "error" is actually on their SS card, not their tax return! And yes, definitely verify your state return has the correct spelling too, as some states are pickier about name matches than the federal system.
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!
This is really helpful advice! I'm dealing with a similar situation on my first rental property and didn't realize how important getting the right documentation would be. Quick question - when you mention checking the original purchase documents, should I be looking at the HUD-1 settlement statement specifically, or are there other documents from closing that might have this information? My closing was a bit of a blur and I'm not sure what paperwork might be relevant for the land allocation.
@da3c09432493 Great question! You'll want to check several documents from your closing package: 1) The HUD-1/Closing Disclosure - sometimes shows the breakdown if an appraisal was done 2) The purchase appraisal report - often has a land/building allocation section 3) Property deed - occasionally mentions land value for condos 4) Title insurance policy - may reference land percentages 5) Any condo-specific documents like the Public Offering Statement or Declaration If your appraisal report has a "cost approach" section, that's gold - it usually breaks down land vs. improvement values. Even if the percentages seem off, having that documentation from closing gives you a defensible basis. Also check if your lender required a condo questionnaire - those sometimes include land allocation info that the HOA provided during your loan approval process.
Your land allocation percentage is definitely way too low and could cause serious problems with the IRS. I had a similar issue with my rental condo where the county assessment showed an unrealistic land value. Here's what worked for me: I contacted my condo association's management company and requested the original developer's allocation percentage. Most condos have this information buried in the master deed or declaration documents from when the building was first converted to condominiums. In my case, the official allocation was 18% - vastly different from what the tax assessment suggested. The management company provided me with a letter referencing the specific document and page number where this was established. Using your current calculation method with such a low land percentage ($26,090 annual depreciation) is almost certainly going to trigger an audit red flag. A more realistic 15-18% land allocation would put you around $22,000-23,000 in annual depreciation, which is much more defensible. Don't rely on municipal assessments for depreciation purposes - they're often completely disconnected from the actual land/building ratios used for tax depreciation. Get the official documentation from your condo association first, and if that's not available, use a conservative percentage in the 15-20% range with proper documentation of your reasoning. Also confirm you're using your original $720k purchase price as the basis - the current appraised value doesn't matter for depreciation calculations.
This is exactly the guidance I needed! I'm in a very similar situation with my first rental condo and was getting completely different numbers from the county assessment versus what seemed reasonable. @db2df52f7d9f When you contacted your management company, did you have to explain why you needed this information, or did they readily provide it? I'm worried they might not understand the tax implications or be reluctant to dig through old documents. Also, for anyone else following this thread - I just realized I should probably double-check what my original appraisal from purchase said about land allocation. I vaguely remember the appraiser mentioning something about the cost approach, but I didn't pay attention at the time since I was just focused on the final value for the loan. The difference between using 0.35% versus 15-18% is huge - we're talking about potentially $3,000-4,000 difference in annual depreciation, which could really add up over the years or cause major problems if audited.
I completely understand the confusion about transcript codes - they really do seem designed to be as cryptic as possible! I've been helping people navigate these waters for years, and the minus sign question comes up constantly. You're absolutely right to be confused by the backwards logic. In normal accounting, we expect positive numbers to mean good news, but the IRS uses government accounting principles where outflows (like refunds) appear as negative amounts. It's essentially showing their perspective - money leaving their accounts to go to you. The combination of your "refund approved" status on WMR plus the minus sign on your transcript is the perfect storm of good news. TC 150 is just the starting gun - it means your return entered their system and was accepted. Now you're waiting for the finish line, which is TC 846 (refund issued) with your actual deposit date. Pro tip: Once TC 846 appears, check if there's a specific date next to it. That's typically your deposit date, and it's usually very accurate. Most banks process IRS deposits early morning on that date. The waiting game is definitely the hardest part, but you're in excellent shape based on what you're seeing. Your navigation skills are just fine - the IRS just uses a really weird map! ๐งญ
This is such a helpful explanation! I really appreciate you taking the time to break down the government accounting logic - it makes so much more sense when you explain it from the IRS's perspective of money flowing out of their accounts. The "weird map" analogy is perfect ๐ I've been checking my transcript obsessively, but now I know to specifically watch for that TC 846 code with the deposit date. It's reassuring to hear from someone with experience helping others through this process that my situation looks good. Thanks for the pro tip about the deposit date accuracy - that'll definitely help manage my expectations once I see that code appear!
The transcript code confusion is so real! I went through the exact same panic when I first saw that minus sign - my brain immediately went to "oh no, they're taking money from me" instead of "yay, they're giving me money!" ๐ What helped me understand it was thinking about it from the IRS's bookkeeping perspective. When they owe you a refund, it's a liability on their books, so it shows up as a negative number (money they need to pay out). It's like when your credit card statement shows a negative balance - that means the company owes YOU money. The TC 150 is really just their way of saying "we got your return and it's in the system." Nothing to stress about there. And since WMR is showing "refund approved," you're golden! I'd echo what others have said about watching for TC 846 - that's when you'll see your actual deposit date and know exactly when to expect the money. In my experience, once that code shows up, the deposit usually happens right on schedule. The whole system definitely feels like it was designed by people who forgot that normal humans would need to read these things! But once you crack the code (pun intended), it becomes much less mysterious. Sounds like your refund is well on its way! ๐
Noah Torres
Brooklyn, I'm so glad you posted this question! I had the exact same confusion when I first saw Code 806 on my transcript last year. Everyone here has given you fantastic explanations - it really is your federal income tax withholding credits, which is basically all the money that was already taken out of your paychecks throughout the year for taxes. What helped me understand it was thinking of Code 806 as proof that I'd been making "installment payments" to the IRS all year long through my employer. Every time I got paid, my employer withheld some money and sent it directly to the IRS on my behalf. Code 806 is just the IRS saying "We received all those payments you made throughout the year!" Since you mentioned investment income, here's something useful: if you had any backup withholding on your investment accounts (usually 24% when there are issues with your tax ID number), that would also be rolled into your Code 806 amount. You'd see this on any 1099 forms in the federal tax withheld box. The best part about understanding Code 806 is realizing it's money working in your favor - it directly reduces what you owe dollar for dollar. It's definitely something to be excited about! Your attention to detail with your finances is really going to serve you well in understanding all these tax codes. ๐
0 coins
Omar Fawzi
โข@Noah Torres Your installment "payments analogy" is perfect! As someone who s'completely new to understanding tax transcripts, that really helps me visualize what s'been happening with my paychecks all year. I always knew taxes were being taken out, but I never really thought about it as making payments to the IRS on my behalf - that makes so much sense! I just checked my most recent paystub and you re'right, I can see the year-to-date federal withholding building up. It s'actually pretty cool to realize I ve'been systematically paying my taxes all along without even thinking about it. Thank you for explaining the backup withholding piece too - I do have some investment income so it s'good to know that would be included in the Code 806 total. This whole thread has been incredibly educational for someone like me who s'trying to get better at understanding taxes instead of just blindly trusting software to handle everything!
0 coins
Anastasia Kuznetsov
Brooklyn, I completely understand that excitement! ๐ Code 806 was such a mystery to me when I first started looking at tax transcripts too. Everyone here has given you excellent explanations - it's definitely your federal income tax withholding credits, which represents all the tax money that was already deducted from your paychecks throughout the year. What really helped me grasp this concept was realizing that Code 806 is essentially the IRS's receipt for all the tax payments your employer made on your behalf every pay period. It's like they're saying "We acknowledge receiving all these payments throughout the year!" Since you mentioned being meticulous about your finances, here's a quick verification step: gather all your W-2 forms and add up the amounts in Box 2 (Federal income tax withheld). If you received any 1099 forms showing federal tax withheld, include those too. The total should match your Code 806 amount exactly. Regarding your investment income question - yes! Any backup withholding from your investment accounts (typically 24% if there were tax ID issues) would be included in this Code 806 total. You'd see this reported on your 1099-DIV or 1099-INT forms. The beautiful thing about Code 806 is that it works as a direct credit against your tax liability - every dollar shown there is a dollar you've already paid toward your tax bill. It's definitely one of the "good" codes to see on your transcript! Keep up that attention to detail - understanding these codes will really help you stay on top of your tax situation year-round.
0 coins