I'm in the exact same boat - day 21 here with my CA refund stuck at "issued" status! Filed in early March, got the "issued" notification on March 28th, and still absolutely nothing in my account. Like everyone else, my federal refund came through in 5 days no problem, so I know it's not my banking info. What's really frustrating is the complete lack of transparency from FTB. Their phone system is essentially designed to keep you away from actual humans - I've called probably 20+ times and always get that "high call volume" recording before they hang up. Meanwhile they can penalize us instantly for late payments but hold our own money hostage for weeks beyond their stated timeframes. I'm going to try that buried chat option several people mentioned and maybe look into those callback services. Ridiculous that we have to pay third parties just to get basic info about our own refunds, but at this point I'm desperate for answers. Thanks for posting this OP - it's oddly comforting to know this is such a widespread systematic issue. Really shows there's something seriously broken in their processing system that they're not acknowledging publicly. Hopefully we all see some movement soon because this level of dysfunction is completely unacceptable! 🤞

Same exact situation here - day 25 with my CA refund stuck at "issued" status! Filed March 8th, got the "issued" notification on March 26th, and still nothing. My federal refund hit my account in 4 days, so definitely not a banking issue on my end. What's really infuriating is how they can instantly process tax payments and penalties but somehow can't manage to send out refunds within their own stated timeframes. The double standard is ridiculous - if we're late by even one day they charge interest, but they can be late by weeks with zero consequences. I've given up on their phone system after 30+ failed attempts. Going to try that chat option people mentioned and maybe one of those callback services. At this point I'm willing to pay just to talk to an actual human who can explain what's happening with my own money. Thanks for posting this - it's somewhat reassuring to know we're all dealing with the same CA FTB nightmare. Hopefully they get their systems fixed soon because this level of dysfunction is completely unacceptable for a state agency!

This is a fascinating discussion on tax reform! As someone who's dealt with the complexity of our current system, I really appreciate the elegance of your flat tax proposal. One aspect I haven't seen discussed much is how this would affect small business owners and self-employed individuals. Currently, we have a lot of business deductions that help offset the higher effective tax rates we face due to self-employment taxes. Under your system, would business expenses still be deductible? Things like equipment, office supplies, travel, etc.? If we eliminate most deductions for simplicity but keep business expenses, that creates an interesting dynamic where business owners might have significantly different effective rates than W-2 employees at the same income level. Also, I'm curious about how this would interact with retirement savings. Would contributions to 401(k)s and IRAs still be deductible, or would those be eliminated too? The current tax-advantaged retirement accounts are a major way people reduce their current tax burden while saving for the future. The more I think about it, the more I realize how many policy goals our current tax system tries to achieve beyond just raising revenue - encouraging retirement savings, homeownership, charitable giving, business investment, etc. Your proposal would essentially be saying we should achieve those goals through other means rather than the tax code.

As a tax professional who's worked with clients across all income levels, I think your proposal has merit but would need some refinements to be practical. The biggest issue I see is that eliminating most deductions could create unintended hardships. For example, medical expenses can be catastrophic - a family facing a serious illness shouldn't lose the ability to deduct extraordinary medical costs just for the sake of simplicity. However, I do like the core concept of high standard deductions paired with a flat rate. It would dramatically reduce compliance costs and make tax preparation accessible to almost everyone without professional help. One modification to consider: instead of eliminating ALL deductions, maybe keep a very short list of the most essential ones - medical expenses above a threshold, state and local taxes (capped), and business expenses. This preserves some fairness while maintaining most of the simplicity benefits. Regarding revenue, you could implement this gradually. Start with your proposed structure but adjust the rate and deduction levels based on actual revenue data from the first few years. This would let you fine-tune the system without the political impossibility of getting everything perfect from day one. The administrative savings alone would be enormous - both for taxpayers and the IRS. That has real economic value beyond just the tax rates themselves.

As someone who's been navigating LLC taxation issues myself, I can confirm what others have said - you absolutely can use your EIN instead of your SSN in this situation! The fact that the checks were made out to your personal name doesn't change the underlying tax treatment. What I found helpful when dealing with resistant clients is to frame it as a business best practice rather than just a personal preference. You can explain that using EINs instead of SSNs helps protect against identity theft and is actually the preferred method for business transactions. Most business owners understand and respect this reasoning. If the new manager continues to push back, you might also mention that many businesses are moving away from collecting SSNs unnecessarily due to data security concerns. Banks, insurance companies, and other financial institutions are all reducing their SSN usage - it's becoming standard practice to use EINs whenever possible for business relationships. One thing that's worked well for me is offering to provide additional documentation if they're concerned about compliance - like a copy of my LLC certificate or a letter from my accountant confirming the tax treatment. Usually just offering this level of documentation (even if they don't actually want it) demonstrates that you're serious about proper compliance and helps build their confidence in accepting your EIN.

Welcome to the community @Jamal Washington! You're absolutely right that having official IRS resources to reference can make all the difference. I've found that pointing clients to specific IRS guidance works much better than just explaining it myself. The most useful resources I've found are: 1. IRS Publication 3402 (Tax Issues for Limited Liability Companies) - specifically Section 3 which covers single-member LLCs 2. The instructions for Form W-9, which explicitly state that single-member LLCs can provide their EIN 3. IRS.gov's FAQ section on business structures, which has a clear explanation of disregarded entity status What I typically do is send a brief email with links to these resources along with my completed W-9 form. I phrase it something like: "For your reference, here are the relevant IRS guidelines that confirm single-member LLCs can use their EIN for 1099 reporting purposes, even when payments are made to the owner personally." Most accounting departments appreciate having the official documentation to keep in their files. It gives them confidence that they're handling things correctly and provides backup if there's ever a question during an audit. The key is making it easy for them to verify the information rather than just taking your word for it. Good luck with your situation - stick to your guns! Using your EIN is not only your right, but it's also the smarter approach from a privacy and security standpoint.

One thing that helped me understand this better was thinking of the tax brackets as buckets that fill up. Each bucket has a different tax rate: For 2023 Married Filing Jointly: $0-$22,000: 10% bucket $22,001-$89,450: 12% bucket $89,451-$190,750: 22% bucket And so on... If you and your spouse each make $60,000, individually you'd only fill up the 10% and part of the 12% bucket. But combined ($120,000), you fill the 10% bucket, the entire 12% bucket, and spill into the 22% bucket. The problem is that when your employer withholds based on "married filing jointly" without knowing about your spouse's income, they think you only need to fill those first two buckets. That's why you're underwithholding.

Just want to add that you don't want to select "married filing separately" on your W4 like you suggested. That's actually a specific tax filing status with its own tax brackets, and it's usually less favorable than married filing jointly. Many tax credits and deductions aren't available when you file separately. What you want is to either: 1. Check the box in Step 2(c) on the W4 form 2. Use the "Multiple Jobs Worksheet" on page 3 of the W4 3. Use the IRS Tax Withholding Estimator online and follow its recommendations Also, it's not as simple as "gross salary minus 22%" because the US has a progressive tax system. You pay 10% on the first chunk of income, then 12% on the next chunk, then 22% on income above that threshold.

Don't forget, even though you need to file Form 709 for the excess amount, you probably won't owe any actual gift tax unless you've already given away millions over your lifetime. The form is basically just tracking your lifetime exemption usage. I filed one last year for a late 2021 gift and it was pretty straightforward with TurboTax.

Great question! I went through something similar last year. Yes, you absolutely need to file Form 709 for the $6,500 excess, but don't panic - it's definitely not too late. The IRS doesn't have a strict deadline for gift tax returns when no tax is actually owed. Regarding the rent situation, that gets a bit tricky. If you were staying there occasionally and getting some personal benefit, you might be able to argue that only a portion of the rent payments were gifts. The IRS looks at the "fair market value" of what you received versus what you paid. I'd definitely document how often you stayed there and keep any records of the arrangement. One thing that might help reduce your reportable gift amount - if any of that $22,500 was paid directly to educational institutions (tuition, fees, etc.), those payments don't count toward the annual exclusion limit at all. But since you mentioned giving the money to your niece directly, it sounds like the full amount would count as a gift. For filing help, I'd suggest starting with tax software like TurboTax or FreeTaxUSA - they both handle Form 709 and are much cheaper than hiring a professional for something this straightforward. You're likely just reporting against your lifetime exemption with no actual tax owed.