I went through this exact same situation last year with my Energy Transfer units in my Roth IRA! The confusion is totally understandable - getting a K-1 addressed to you personally when the investment is in a retirement account really throws you off. As others have confirmed, you don't need to report this on your personal tax return. The K-1 income stays within the tax-advantaged Roth environment. I made the mistake of initially entering mine into TurboTax and then had to go back and remove it after consulting with my tax preparer. One practical tip: I called Energy Transfer's investor relations line (you can find it on their website) and asked them to update the registration to show "Vanguard FBO [Your Name] Roth IRA" for future K-1 mailings. It took about 10 minutes and now I get them properly addressed, which eliminates the confusion each year. Also, definitely keep that K-1 with your investment records as others mentioned - not for immediate tax purposes, but for your own documentation. The $425 in ordinary income you mentioned is pretty typical for Energy Transfer and shouldn't cause any UBTI concerns. You can breathe easy and focus on the rest of your tax return!

I just wanted to add my experience as someone who's dealt with this exact scenario for several years now. I hold Energy Transfer LP units in both my Roth IRA and a taxable brokerage account, so I get two K-1s each year - one for each account. The difference in how you handle them is night and day. For the units in my taxable account, I absolutely have to report all the K-1 income, track basis adjustments, deal with depreciation recapture, etc. It's honestly a nightmare that requires professional help. But for the units in my Roth IRA? I literally just file the K-1 away with my investment records and forget about it. No reporting, no basis tracking complications, no tax calculations. That's the beauty of the Roth structure. The key thing that helped me understand this was realizing that the Roth IRA is essentially a separate tax entity. Anything that happens inside it stays inside it from a tax perspective. The only time you'd ever have tax implications is if the IRA itself generated over $1,000 in UBTI (which would require the custodian to file Form 990-T), but as others have mentioned, that's pretty rare with typical MLP investments. So Diego, you can definitely breathe easy and just ignore that K-1 for your personal tax filing. Save yourself the stress and complexity!

I went through almost the exact same situation last year with my father's inherited IRA. The key thing that saved me was understanding that the 1099-R reporting doesn't automatically reflect rollovers - you have to manually indicate this on your tax return. Here's what worked for me: On Form 1040, I reported both 1099-R amounts on the "IRA distributions" line, but then on the "taxable amount" line, I only included the actual disbursement ($12,500 in your case). I attached a statement explaining that $215,000 was a direct rollover to an inherited IRA and therefore not taxable. The IRS accepted this without question. Make sure you keep detailed records of the rollover transaction - account statements showing the money going from the original IRA directly into your new beneficiary IRA. This documentation is crucial if you ever get audited. One tip: if you used different financial institutions for the original and new IRAs, the transfer might have been coded as a distribution + contribution rather than a direct rollover, which could explain why you're seeing it as taxable income. This can usually be corrected with proper documentation on your return.

I had a very similar situation with my grandmother's IRA last year and want to share what I learned through the process. The confusion you're experiencing is unfortunately very common because the 1099-R forms don't automatically show the full picture of what happened with your money. You're absolutely right that you shouldn't be taxed on both the transfer AND the disbursement - that would indeed be double taxation. The $215,000 that went directly into your beneficiary IRA should not be taxable income since it remained in a qualified retirement account. Here's what I discovered: You need to look carefully at both 1099-R forms. The first one (for the $215,000) should have a distribution code in Box 7 - likely code 4 since it's a death benefit. However, it probably doesn't have a rollover code like G or H, which is why it's appearing as fully taxable. When you file your return, you'll report the full amount from both 1099-Rs on the "IRA distributions" line, but on the "taxable amount" line, you should only include the $12,500 that you actually received as cash. The difference ($215,000) should be reported as a non-taxable rollover. I strongly recommend keeping detailed documentation of the transfer - bank statements, account opening documents for the beneficiary IRA, and any correspondence with the financial institutions. If the transfer happened between different companies, make sure you have proof it was completed within the required timeframe. The IRS sees this type of situation frequently, so as long as you document it properly on your return, it should process without issues. Consider consulting with a tax professional if you're unsure about the specific forms to complete, as inherited IRA rules can be quite complex.

Has anyone dealt with this by sending a letter through certified mail? I'm in a similar situation and wondering if regular mail is good enough or if I should spend the extra money on certified mail with return receipt.

I went through almost the exact same thing last year! The IRS penalty notice made no sense since I had clear proof of payment before the deadline. Here's what I learned from my experience: First, get your account transcript from the IRS website (irs.gov) - it's free and shows exactly how they've recorded your payments. In my case, the transcript revealed that my payment was applied to the wrong tax year due to a data entry error on their end. Second, gather ALL your payment documentation - bank statements, confirmation numbers, screenshots from your tax software, anything that shows the payment date and amount. The IRS will need this to correct their records. Third, respond to the notice in writing with copies of all your proof. I sent mine certified mail with return receipt (costs about $7 but gives you proof they received it). In my letter, I requested penalty abatement under "reasonable cause" since I had paid on time and it was their processing error. The whole process took about 6 weeks, but they completely removed the penalty and sent me a letter confirming the correction. Don't just ignore it hoping it goes away - these penalties can grow with interest if not addressed promptly. The frustrating part is that these processing errors happen more often than the IRS likes to admit, especially during busy filing season. But they will fix it once you provide the documentation.

Don't forget to keep copies of EVERYTHING you send them! I made the mistake of sending my only copies of some receipts, and then the IRS said they never got them. Now I make at least 2 copies of everything before sending. Also include your case number or tax ID number on EVERY page you send. Sometimes the pages get separated in their processing centers.

Just wanted to add something that helped me when I was in a similar situation - check if there's a "Notice Number" or "Letter ID" on your IRS letter (usually something like "Letter 525-C" or "Notice CP2000"). This number is crucial to include in your response and on your envelope. I also recommend writing "Response to [Notice Number]" clearly on the outside of your envelope along with your SSN or Individual Taxpayer Identification Number. This helps their mail processing center route your response to the correct department faster. And definitely agree with everyone saying to use certified mail with return receipt! I learned this lesson after my first response supposedly got "lost" in their system. The extra $6-8 for certified mail is nothing compared to the potential penalties and interest if they claim they never received your response. One last tip - respond as soon as possible but don't rush so much that you make mistakes. The IRS typically gives you 30 days to respond, but responding earlier shows good faith and gives you a buffer in case there are any issues with delivery.

Make sure you check if your state has any special provisions for joint filers with an unemployed spouse! Some states have additional credits or deductions that the federal return doesn't have. I live in Minnesota and found out we qualified for a special credit because of my wife's job loss that saved us almost $400 on our state return.

Great question! You're definitely on the right track thinking about filing jointly. In your situation with your husband being unemployed for part of the year, filing jointly is almost certainly going to be your best option. Here's what you need to know: You'll report both your full $68,000 income and his $31,000 from before the layoff on a joint return. The IRS doesn't penalize you for one spouse having no income for part of the year - they just look at your total household income. A few key things to remember: - If your husband received unemployment benefits, those are taxable income and need to be included - You'll get the higher married filing jointly standard deduction ($29,200 for 2025) - You may qualify for additional credits that aren't available when filing separately - Make sure to have his final W-2 from his previous employer and any 1099-G forms for unemployment The documentation is pretty straightforward - just gather all your normal tax documents plus any unemployment paperwork. In most cases like yours, filing jointly saves significantly more money than filing separately, but it's worth running the numbers both ways to be sure.