This is completely unethical behavior from that tax firm. As someone who's dealt with multiple CPAs over the years, I can tell you that legitimate professionals ALWAYS disclose their fees before providing any services. The fact that they waited until the end of an hour-long call to mention a $350 fee is a huge red flag. It sounds like they deliberately padded the consultation with unnecessary information to justify a higher bill. Any competent tax professional should be able to address your specific employment tax questions in 15-20 minutes without going into basic concepts you already understand. I'd strongly recommend disputing this charge. Send them a written response explaining that no fee was disclosed prior to the consultation, that much of the call consisted of irrelevant basic tax information, and that you're willing to pay a reasonable amount ($100-125) for the actual relevant advice you received. Don't let them intimidate you with the "we're very busy" response. Being busy doesn't excuse poor business practices or lack of transparency. Professional service providers have an ethical obligation to disclose fees upfront, and most state licensing boards have rules about this. Document everything and consider filing a complaint with your state's CPA board if they won't work with you on a reasonable settlement. This kind of behavior gives the entire profession a bad reputation.

This is a classic case of poor professional ethics. As a tax professional myself, I'm appalled by their behavior. No reputable firm should ever provide billable services without clear fee disclosure upfront. The fact that they stretched a simple employment tax consultation to exactly one hour with unnecessary explanations sounds intentionally deceptive. Your situation could have easily been addressed in 20 minutes or less with focused discussion. Here's what I'd recommend: 1) Document everything - the lack of fee disclosure, the unnecessary tangents about basic concepts, and their dismissive response when you questioned the bill. 2) Send a formal written response disputing the charge. Explain that no fees were disclosed and offer a reasonable settlement ($100-150) that reflects the actual value received. 3) If they refuse to negotiate, file complaints with your state CPA board and the Better Business Bureau. This type of billing practice may violate professional standards. 4) Leave detailed reviews warning other clients to ask about fees upfront. Don't pay the full $350. You're not being unreasonable - they failed to follow basic professional standards. Most legitimate firms will settle rather than deal with regulatory complaints over $350, especially when they're clearly in the wrong about fee disclosure. Stand your ground on this one.

Has anyone actually gotten an IRS notice for not reporting a non-taxable 1099-R? I'm in the same boat and wondering what the real-world consequences are if you just do nothing.

I've been through this exact situation and completely understand your stress! The good news is that for a direct 401k rollover with Box 2a blank or zero, you're most likely fine without amending your return. Here's what I learned from my experience: The IRS matching system will see the 1099-R from Vanguard, but since there's no taxable amount, it won't create a discrepancy in your tax liability. The worst case scenario is you might get a CP2000 notice in 6-12 months asking you to confirm the rollover was non-taxable, which you can respond to with a simple letter explaining it was a direct trustee-to-trustee transfer. Your coworker is right - if there's truly no taxable amount, it doesn't change what you owe. However, if you want peace of mind, you could file Form 4852 (which is much simpler than a full 1040-X amendment) to document the situation, or use one of the services others mentioned to get a definitive answer from the IRS directly. Don't let this ruin your organized streak - late forms happen even to the most prepared people, especially when companies send required documents after the typical deadline!

I totally understand your panic! I went through the exact same thing when I first looked at my transcript. "Tax Per Return" is basically the total income tax calculated on your original return before any withholdings, estimated payments, or credits are subtracted. Think of it like the "gross" amount before deductions. So if your Tax Per Return shows $3,500 but you had $4,200 withheld from your paychecks during the year, you'd actually get a $700 refund! That scary high number isn't what you owe right now - it's just your starting tax liability before all your payments get applied. The IRS really needs to use clearer language on these transcripts because this confusion happens to literally everyone. Don't stress about that big number until you see the complete picture with all your withholdings included! 😊

I had this exact same confusion when I first got my transcript! "Tax Per Return" is basically the total income tax that was calculated on your original return before any withholdings, estimated payments, or credits were applied. Think of it like the "before" price before all your payments and deductions get factored in. So if your Tax Per Return shows $5,000 but you had $6,500 withheld from your paychecks throughout the year, you'd actually be getting a $1,500 refund! That big scary number you're seeing isn't what you currently owe the IRS - it's just your baseline tax calculation before everything else gets subtracted. I know it looks intimidating at first, but don't panic! The IRS transcript codes are honestly so confusing for regular people - I spent way too much time googling every single term when I first saw mine. You're definitely not alone in finding these transcripts overwhelming! 😊

Reading through this entire discussion has been incredibly enlightening as someone who's never had to deal with valuing donated items before. The systematic approach everyone has outlined - using conservative depreciation rates, thorough documentation, and professional validation - really demonstrates how to handle these situations properly. What I find most reassuring is how multiple people who actually went through similar donations confirmed that the depreciation method works well in practice, not just in theory. The $3,400 valuation using 20% first year depreciation followed by 10% annually seems very reasonable for a specialized wheelchair that cost $5,300 originally and is still in excellent condition. The documentation checklist from the CPA is particularly valuable: original receipts, timestamped photos, depreciation calculations, comparable price research, and proper charity acknowledgment letters. Having all of this organized upfront clearly makes any potential IRS questions much easier to handle. As someone who may face similar situations in the future, I'm bookmarking this thread as a reference guide. The combination of real-world experiences, professional advice, and specific dollar amounts creates such a practical roadmap for charitable donation valuations. Your father's wheelchair will truly help someone who needs it, and you can feel confident that you're handling the tax aspects with exactly the kind of care and documentation the IRS expects. This community's guidance has been exceptional!

As someone who works in estate administration, I wanted to add another perspective that might be helpful. When handling donations from estates, we regularly deal with medical equipment valuations, and the approach outlined in this thread is exactly what we recommend to our clients. The key insight I'd add is that specialized medical equipment like tilt wheelchairs actually has a more stable resale market than people realize. Unlike consumer electronics that become obsolete quickly, quality medical equipment maintains functionality and value over many years. This supports using the more conservative depreciation rates that have been suggested here. For your situation specifically, I'd document one additional element: the specific medical necessity features of the wheelchair (tilt range, weight capacity, any custom adjustments). These specialized features are expensive to manufacture and significantly impact resale value. A basic wheelchair might depreciate more aggressively, but therapeutic equipment with specialized functions holds value much better. Your $3,400 valuation is very reasonable given the original $5,300 cost and the chair's excellent condition. The systematic documentation approach everyone has outlined will serve you well. I've seen many similar donations go through IRS review without issues when they're properly documented like you're planning to do. The charitable aspect is wonderful too - specialized wheelchairs are always in high demand at medical equipment lending programs and disability organizations. You're making a real difference while handling the tax implications properly.

I'm a benefits coordinator (not tax advice!) and just wanted to add that different employers handle 403b reporting slightly differently. If you work in education or healthcare, there's a good chance you have both mandatory and voluntary contributions. The 403b contribution limits ($23,000 for 2025 for those under 50) only apply to voluntary contributions (those shown in Box 12a with code E). Mandatory contributions don't count toward this limit, which is actually advantageous!

This is really helpful information! I work for a state university and have been dealing with the same confusion. My W2 Box 12a Code E shows $18,500 but I know I contributed more than that throughout the year when I add up my pay stubs. After reading through all these responses, I now understand that my university requires a mandatory 3% contribution that doesn't show up in Box 12a - only my voluntary contributions do. I was worried I had made an error somewhere or that payroll had messed up my W2. It's actually pretty smart that they separate these on the W2 since the IRS needs to track voluntary contributions differently for the annual limits. Thanks everyone for clearing this up - I was about to call HR thinking there was a mistake!