Just went through this exact same situation last month! You're right that it used to be more clearly labeled on older versions of the 1040. The extension payment definitely goes on line 26 along with any estimated tax payments you made during the year. If you only made the extension payment and no quarterly estimates, just put the $2,800 on line 26. The IRS has your payment tied to your SSN from when you filed Form 4868, so they'll match it up automatically when they process your return. One tip: make sure the amount you enter matches exactly what you paid with your extension. I've seen people accidentally round numbers or include fees, which can cause processing delays. Keep your extension confirmation handy just in case!

I'm looking at the 2025 1040, and it seems that if you use Schedule 3 ("Additional Credits and Payments"), there you will find, on Line 10, the "Amount paid with request for extension to file" item that you remember. (So, no, you're not crazy.) The Line 10 on Schedule 3 gets summed into Line 15, which then goes onto your main 1040 Form on Line 31. Hope this helps - I was wondering the same thing!

I had the same experience with TurboTax's premium services last year - felt like they were trying to upsell me at every turn. The audit protection sounds scary when you're filing, but statistically most people never need it. What really bothers me is how they've made their interface more confusing to push these add-ons. I ended up paying the $59 because I was rushing to file before the deadline, but honestly I never used any of the premium features. This year I'm planning to shop around more and compare the actual value vs. the fear-based marketing they use to sell these packages. The identity protection stuff is especially questionable since most banks and credit cards already offer similar monitoring for free. Seems like they're just repackaging services you probably already have access to.

Does anyone know the difference between the Max Turbo Tax Benefits for 79 dollars and the premium services fee 44?

Just want to add something - if your mom has been using the same accountant for years, it might be worth a quick call to them to ask about this discrepancy before filing differently. Sometimes there are specific situations or history with the account that might explain the different treatment. Good on you for helping your mom save money though. $400+ is a lot for what sounds like a relatively simple return!

I went through something very similar with my grandmother's taxes after my grandfather passed. The emotional stress of dealing with finances during grief is overwhelming, so kudos to you for stepping in to help your mom. From what you've described, FreeTaxUSA is likely correct. For traditional IRA distributions that are fully taxable (which most are), both line 4a (total distributions) and line 4b (taxable amount) should show the same figure. The fact that your mom's previous preparer left 4a blank is actually incorrect according to current IRS instructions. This might have been an older practice or just a mistake that carried forward year after year. The good news is that if the taxable amount was properly reported on 4b, it probably didn't affect the actual tax calculation - but it's still not the proper way to complete the form. I'd suggest sticking with FreeTaxUSA's approach. You're not only saving your mom money but also ensuring the form is filled out correctly. Just make sure to double-check that the amounts match what's shown in boxes 1 and 2a of her 1099-R form.

This is such a helpful thread! I've been struggling with this exact same Form 8960 issue and getting different results from different tax software. After reading through all the responses here, I'm now confident that the correct approach is to use the ratio method (investment income ÷ total income) multiplied by the FULL state tax amount without applying the SALT cap. What really convinced me was the multiple confirmations from IRS agents that others obtained through various channels. The distinction between Schedule A deduction limits and NIIT allocation rules makes sense - they're separate tax calculations with different purposes. I'm going to recalculate my Form 8960 using this method. Based on my numbers, it should reduce my NIIT by about $200, which is significant enough to make it worth filing an amended return if I've already submitted. Thanks to everyone who shared their experiences and research - this kind of practical tax guidance is invaluable for those of us trying to navigate these complex forms correctly!

I'm completely new to this community and just discovered this amazing thread while pulling my hair out over Form 8960! Like so many others here, I was getting wildly different NIIT calculations between different tax software - about a $165 difference between TaxSlayer and TaxAct that had me totally confused. After reading through this entire discussion, I'm blown away by how thoroughly everyone worked through this complex issue. The collaborative approach here is incredible - seeing people verify the same methodology through IRS calls, CPA consultations, AI tools, and Treasury Regulation research really builds confidence in the solution. The explanation about NIIT operating as a separate tax system designed to prevent double taxation (rather than provide additional deductions) finally made the rules click for me. That's why the SALT cap doesn't apply to the Form 8960 Line 9b allocation - it's fundamentally different from Schedule A deduction limits. I worked through my numbers using the consensus methodology: $55,000 investment income ÷ $220,000 total income = 25%, then 25% × $16,200 state taxes = $4,050 for Line 9b. This should reduce my NIIT by about $154, which definitely makes getting this right worthwhile! The concrete examples with real numbers throughout this thread were incredibly helpful for understanding the mechanics. I'm documenting my calculation method along with the Treasury Regulation 1.1411-4(f)(3) reference that was mentioned multiple times. Thank you all for sharing your research and experiences - this kind of community knowledge-sharing is exactly what makes complex tax situations manageable for newcomers like me!

This thread has been incredibly educational! As someone who was completely confused by all the Amazon tax headlines, I really appreciate everyone breaking down the actual mechanisms behind corporate taxation. One thing that struck me is how much the conversation keeps coming back to the complexity of the tax code itself. It sounds like the real issue isn't companies following the rules, but whether the rules create the outcomes we want as a society. The fact that there's now international coordination through things like the global minimum tax shows this is a recognized policy challenge, not just companies being "sneaky." For those of us with small businesses, it seems like the key lesson is to focus on understanding the legitimate strategies available to us rather than getting distracted by what mega-corporations do. The scale and complexity are just completely different worlds. I'm curious though - for someone starting out, is it worth investing in professional tax advice early on, or are there good DIY resources for understanding small business tax strategy? I don't want to overpay for services I don't need, but I also don't want to miss out on legitimate deductions because I didn't know they existed.

We live in an upside down world wake up people!!!