I went through this exact same confusion two years ago and it drove me crazy! You're absolutely right that the form used to be clearer about extension payments. Line 26 is definitely the correct place for your $2,800 extension payment. What helped me understand it was realizing that from the IRS's perspective, both quarterly estimated payments and extension payments serve the same purpose - they're advance payments toward your tax liability. That's why they combined them on one line. Make sure you have your Form 4868 confirmation handy when you file, just in case there are any questions later. The IRS should automatically match your payment to your return using your SSN, but having that backup documentation gives you peace of mind. One tip: if you're using tax software, some programs will actually ask you specifically if you made an extension payment and then automatically add it to line 26 for you. But if you're doing it by hand, just enter the $2,800 on line 26 and you're good to go!

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!

This whole discussion really highlights how TurboTax has shifted from being a helpful tax tool to what feels like a profit-maximizing machine with all these upsells. I've been using them for about 6 years and definitely noticed the premium services becoming more prominent and expensive. What's particularly frustrating is how they've designed the checkout flow to make you feel like you're being irresponsible if you don't buy their add-ons. The audit protection marketing is especially manipulative - they present worst-case scenarios without mentioning that audit rates are incredibly low for most taxpayers. I'm really intrigued by the alternative tools people have mentioned here, especially the AI tax review service and the IRS callback system. It seems like there are more targeted solutions available now that actually provide value instead of just selling you insurance on unlikely problems. For anyone on the fence about the premium services: unless you have a genuinely complex tax situation with multiple income streams, significant business deductions, or unusual circumstances that might trigger an audit, you're probably better off saving that $59 and putting it toward something more useful. The identity monitoring and priority support just aren't worth what they're charging, especially when you likely already have similar protections through your bank or credit card company. Thanks to everyone who shared their real experiences here - this is exactly the kind of honest feedback that helps cut through the marketing noise!

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

I'm so sorry for your family's loss and the difficult situation you're navigating. Losing someone who handled all the finances can feel incredibly overwhelming, especially during such an emotional time. From everything you've described, FreeTaxUSA is absolutely correct in how it's handling the IRA distribution reporting. For traditional IRA distributions that are fully taxable (which is typical unless there were non-deductible contributions made over the years), both line 4a (total IRA distributions) and line 4b (taxable amount) should show the same amount that matches boxes 1 and 2a on the 1099-R. The previous accountant's practice of leaving line 4a blank while only filling line 4b was actually incorrect according to current IRS instructions. This could have been an outdated method that just kept getting repeated year after year, or possibly a simple oversight that never got caught. What's wonderful is that you're not only helping your mom save $550, but you're also ensuring her taxes are filed more accurately than they have been. The confidence she's gaining in understanding her own finances during this transition is invaluable and will serve her well moving forward. You should feel completely confident proceeding with FreeTaxUSA. The amounts matching between the software and the 1099-R is exactly what you want to see, and you're following proper IRS guidelines. Your mom is fortunate to have such caring support during this challenging time.

I'm so sorry for your family's loss. Going through tax preparation for the first time after losing someone who always handled the finances is incredibly stressful, and you're being such a wonderful support to your mom during this difficult time. You're absolutely doing the right thing with FreeTaxUSA. Based on your description, the software is correctly reporting the IRA distributions. For traditional IRA distributions that are fully taxable (which is typical), both line 4a (total IRA distributions) and line 4b (taxable amount) should indeed show the same number that matches boxes 1 and 2a on the 1099-R. The previous accountant's practice of leaving line 4a blank while only filling line 4b was actually incorrect according to IRS instructions. This might have been an outdated method or simply an error that got repeated year after year. While it probably didn't change the actual tax owed, it's not the proper way to complete the form. What's encouraging is that your mom is not only saving over $500, but she's also getting more accurate tax preparation than she has been receiving. The fact that she's gaining confidence in understanding her own finances during this transition is wonderful - that knowledge and independence will serve her well going forward. Trust FreeTaxUSA on this one. You have the 1099-R documentation to support the amounts, and you're following current IRS guidelines correctly.

I'm new to this community and just found this thread while struggling with the exact same Form 8960 issue! The $130 difference between tax software programs had me completely stumped, and I was starting to panic about filing incorrectly. This discussion has been absolutely invaluable - seeing how everyone systematically worked through this complex problem gives me so much confidence. The consensus about using the full state tax amount (without the SALT cap) in the investment income ratio calculation makes perfect sense now, especially with the explanation about NIIT being designed as a separate tax system to prevent double taxation. I ran my numbers using this methodology: $45,000 investment income ÷ $180,000 total income = 25%, then 25% × $12,800 state taxes = $3,200 for Line 9b. This should save me about $122 in NIIT compared to what I was calculating before. The multiple confirmations from IRS agents, CPAs, and the Treasury Regulation 1.1411-4(f)(3) citation really solidify this approach. I'm documenting everything carefully including my calculation method and the regulatory basis for it. Thank you all for sharing your research and experiences - this collaborative problem-solving approach is exactly what I needed to navigate this confusing situation with confidence!

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!