These clowns at the IRS need to get it together fr... why we gotta jump thru all these hoops just to get OUR money back 🤡

Been in a similar situation - got my advocate assigned 3 weeks ago and finally got movement yesterday! They called me back within 48 hours of my initial voicemail which was promising. Make sure you answer when they call because they don't always leave detailed messages. In my case, they needed one additional document but once I faxed it over, they said 2-3 weeks for resolution. The wait is brutal but you're definitely in the home stretch now 🙏

Great discussion everyone! As someone who's been through this exact situation, I'd add one more consideration - timing matters for tax planning. If you're getting promoted late in the year, the PUCC benefit gets prorated, so your first-year tax impact might be smaller than expected. This could be a good time to "test drive" the benefit and see how it works out practically before committing long-term. Also, don't forget about state taxes! Some states treat fringe benefits differently than federal, so the total tax impact could vary significantly depending on where you live. In my case, my state doesn't tax fringe benefits the same way as federal, which made the company car even more attractive. One last tip - if your company offers multiple vehicle options, the car's value makes a huge difference in the taxable benefit calculation. Sometimes choosing a slightly less expensive model can significantly reduce your tax burden while still giving you all the practical benefits.

Don't overlook the impact on your Social Security and Medicare taxes too! The PUCC benefit isn't just subject to income tax - it's also subject to FICA taxes (Social Security and Medicare), which adds another 7.65% on top of your regular income tax rate. So using the earlier example of $6,370 in taxable benefit, you'd pay about $487 in additional FICA taxes plus the $1,529 in income tax, bringing your total to around $2,016. Still likely worth it compared to operating your own vehicle, but it's a cost that often gets overlooked in these calculations. Also, if you're close to the Social Security wage cap ($168,600 for 2024), this extra income could push you over and actually reduce your effective FICA rate on the benefit. Worth considering if you're in that income range! Another practical tip - some companies allow you to "buy down" the personal use percentage by paying for your own gas when using the car personally. This can reduce the calculated benefit since fuel is typically included in the IRS valuation tables.

This is definitely the company trying to avoid registering in multiple states! My old job tried to pull this same thing. They don't want to deal with the paperwork and maybe additional business taxes that come with having nexus in multiple states. You should know that some states are actually suing companies for doing this! They're losing out on tax revenue when companies pretend their remote workers don't exist.

This is a frustrating situation that unfortunately many remote workers are dealing with. Your instincts are correct - you should be paying income tax to the state where you physically work and reside, not where your employer's headquarters happens to be located. The company is likely trying to avoid the administrative hassle and costs of registering for payroll taxes in your state. When they have an employee working in a state, they typically need to register there, withhold that state's income taxes, and potentially pay other business taxes too. Here's what I'd recommend: First, document everything in writing with your HR department. Explain that state income taxes should be based on where work is physically performed. If they refuse to budge, you'll probably need to go the dual-filing route that others have mentioned - let them withhold for the wrong state temporarily, then file as a nonresident there to get your refund while filing properly in your home state. Keep detailed records of where you work (utility bills, internet bills, etc.) as proof of your work location. This protects you if either state ever questions your filings. The good news is this situation is becoming common enough that most tax authorities understand it, even if some employers are still trying to avoid their obligations.

Does anyone know if you need to file for a FICA refund if you're filing your annual tax return anyway? Couldn't you just claim these excess deductions on your 1040NR?

I just went through this exact same situation as an F1 STEM OPT student! One thing I'd add to the great advice already given is to make sure you keep detailed records of everything. I created a spreadsheet tracking each pay period where FICA was incorrectly withheld, along with the specific amounts for Social Security and Medicare taxes. Also, don't let your employer off the hook completely. Even though they're being uncooperative about providing documentation, they are still required by law to correct their records and stop future withholding. You might want to escalate within HR or contact their payroll department directly - sometimes different departments are more helpful. One more tip: when you file Form 843, include a cover letter clearly explaining your situation. I wrote a simple one-page letter stating I was an F1 student on STEM OPT, exempt from FICA taxes, and that my employer had incorrectly withheld these taxes. I attached copies of my I-20, EAD card, and pay stubs showing the withholding. This seemed to help the IRS process my claim more efficiently. Good luck with your refund - $4,200 is definitely worth fighting for!

Your hospital sounds just like mine! The CEO makes millions while nurses get 8 days PTO total and have to fight for every raise. I looked at our 990s and our CEO got a $2.4M "retention bonus" the same year they froze our retirement contributions!

As someone who works in non-profit financial oversight, I want to add that there are actually whistleblower protections for employees who raise concerns about excessive executive compensation. The IRS has specific procedures for reporting potential "excess benefit transactions" at non-profits. If you genuinely believe your CEO's compensation violates the intermediate sanctions rules (which require compensation to be reasonable and properly approved), you can file Form 13909 to report suspected violations. The IRS takes these seriously, especially when there's a pattern of excessive compensation combined with poor employee benefits. However, I'd recommend first trying to work through your organization's governance structure - attending board meetings during public comment periods, or raising concerns through your employee representatives if you have them. Document everything and keep copies of those 990 forms. Sometimes just asking pointed questions about the compensation approval process can prompt boards to be more careful about their oversight responsibilities.