- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
My client received a notice from California stating that her imputed income from her Medical expenses is taxable. However, the medical insurance covered her son and her husband. Shouldn't this amount be tax free for California purposes? Even on her W-2, there was an adjustment for this amount and it was titled "Misc Non-Taxable Compensation." Can someone confirm what I'm saying above is true and if so, what's the CA tax code?
Best Answer Click here
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
The adjustment is probably for HSA since CA does not conform to §223. What is surprising is that this adjustment should have already been reflected in Box 16 of your client's W-2 as that should have been programmed into the payroll setup.
Still an AllStar
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
On the notice, California stated the following:
"A review of your return indicates that your Schedule CA is incorrect.
Schedule CA is used only to report adjustments to federal adjusted gross income (AGI) when that income is taxed differently for state and federal purposes. The difference in taxation must arise from differences between state and federal tax law, not from the source of income."
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
If you had entered Code W as George explained, the HSA amount should flow to Schedule CA (540) Line 7, Column C to increase the state taxable income for wages.
Still an AllStar
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Med Imp Inc
Based on this, I believe it's an imputed income issue. Based on my knowledge, this imputed income wouldn't be taxable in California as it's related to the medical insurance to a spouse and child.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
What is your basis for taking that position? Rule of thumb is that all income is taxable unless specifically excluded by the tax law. Unless you are able to cite the code and Regs for exclusion or exemption, subject to CA conformity, the presumption is that the amount is taxable.
If not HSA, it is looking like it could be either an FSA or HRA which, for CA tax purposes, is treated similarly as HSA. Since FSA is a salary reduction plan and should be shown as such on the payslips, the term "Med Imp Inc" wouldn't fit the bill. If Med Imp Inc shows up on the payslip only as a memo entry and doesn't make it to the W-2, I wonder then how FTB was able to pick that up as state adjustment?
I wouldn't venture to guess what the line item may be but ask the client to clarify (and probably provide a copy of the plan policy for review). Or if it is just a trivial amount, it may not even be worth the time and the client may simply agree to settle the incremental tax.
Still an AllStar
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Thank you!
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Still an AllStar
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Look at the W-2. Is box 1 the same as box 16? Is there an entry in box 12 with code W? If you made either of those entries Lacerte should have picked up the difference.
Answers are easy. Questions are hard!
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Thanks-I have a similar question. An individual taxpayer was audited by IRS and the auditor didn't bother to look at the wage and income transcript. As a result, the auditor understated wage income by $114 due to an omitted W-2. Even though the W-2 was omitted from the original return and it was on the wage and income transcript, the auditor overlooked it. The audit is over and taxpayer paid tax on audit from final determination letter. Here is the problem: Taxpayer needs to amend the CA return due to changes on federal audit. If we do the return correctly, we have to increase federal AGI by $114 over the auditor's final determination letter AGI. Is that acceptable? Or is there a place in Lacerte to mark the $114 W-2 as non-taxable to federal in order to match the final determination letter fed AGI and show the $114 as taxable on the CA amended return?