Economic stimulus check and taxpayer death. Program is not picking up date of death. How do I fix it?

[qbteachmt]

If the person was alive Jan 1, 2020, or died that day or later, they are entitled to the full amounts.

Perhaps it would help to review what is really happening:

The funds were paid out as Advanced payment against a projection. The projection used 2018 or 2019 tax returns. But 2020 is the Actuals. You use the 2020 return to reconcile what a person is entitled to, against what they got.


You might want to bookmark these links and read the IRS guidance.


https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/economic-impact-payment-information-center-topic-a-eip-eligibility

https://www.irs.gov/coronavirus/second-eip-faqs#Eligibility

One for each EIP.

[IRonMaN]

Even dead people qualify for the stimulus as long as they were alive on 1/1/20.

[klhh]

 I don't think so. If the taxpayer died before the date the second payment was issued or before the first, then the payment is supposed to be returned.

[BobKamman]

I wish we could survey the two or three people who ask this question every day, what news network they rely on for tax items.  The dismay by some over payments going to widows and orphans was well reported in some places.  The IRS recognition that people alive in 2020 still qualify, not so much.  

[IRonMaN]

Then you are thinking incorrectly.  It is a credit on a 2020 tax return - not a payment on a certain day of the year.

[klhh]

While returning checks sent to the dead was not mandated by the CARES Act or later legislation, at least one ethics expert thinks it’s the right thing to do. "Most if not all of those people who received a check intended for a dead relative know that it was an error,” says Jeffrey Seglin, senior lecturer in public policy at Harvard University and author of The Right Thing, a weekly ethics column. “The stimulus money was not intended to go to dead people. Ethically, the right thing would be to not cash the check."

from aarp

[Just-Lisa-Now-]

thats not how it works

[Just-Lisa-Now-]

If they died in 2018 or 2019 and got the advance on a 2020 credit, yes, IRS requested that people return it.

If they died in 2020 or 2021, they are entitled to the entire amount.

[BobKamman]

If they died in 2020, IRS wanted it back, too.  Until they didn't.  

[qbteachmt]

"I don't think so. If the taxpayer died before the date the second payment was issued or before the first, then the payment is supposed to be returned."

That's because, if you read my input and the IRS guidance, the people whose 2018 tax return was used to Project the Advance, included people who had died in the meantime.

This is Backwards: "While returning checks sent to the dead was not mandated by the CARES Act or later legislation, at least one ethics expert thinks it’s the right thing to do"

People who died in 2020 were alive in 2020 and impacted. For all you know, that specific person died Because Of Covid-19.

"“The stimulus money was not intended to go to dead people. Ethically, the right thing would be to not cash the check.""

Oh, wow. Do you have any idea how this impacted people?

What other media mentions is that any funds you got and don't need, Donate it to others. Support your local food bank, for example.

[BobKamman]

Then the ethical thing for you to do is to send the client elsewhere for return preparation.  

[IRonMaN]

Place $1200 and $600 in the boxes asking for how much they received.  Then tell your client's family to stop by and visit one of us so that we can prepare the return correctly.

[klhh]

Wow! I know this person and what he died from.It was not covid-19.

[qbteachmt]

The tax preparation program is doing the calculation properly; it doesn't "pick up" the date of death, because that date is meaningless for the qualification of either EIP. That isn't how the CARES Act reads.

[IRonMaN]

Then take off your blinders and listen to what everyone is telling you.  The return is prepared correctly by reflecting the credit so file the return accordingly.

[klhh]

You people can be very harsh. I didn't think this was a forum for bashing people who asked questions.

[IRonMaN]

We aren’t harsh.  We kept on telling you what the correct treatment was and you refused to listen.  If you are too stubborn to listen to what folks are telling you, then don’t ask the question.

[BobKamman]

@klhh " at least one ethics expert thinks it’s the right thing to do."

You are being harsh.  This is not a forum to bash others' ethics.  

[sjrcpa]

I don't think we were harsh; maybe just running out of patience. This matter has been discussed numerous times in this forums. Did you look? The answer is available at irs.gov and in the instructions. Did you look? You were given the correct answer here and you weren't believing it.

[qbteachmt]

"You people can be very harsh. I didn't think this was a forum for bashing people who asked questions."

Your own topic here has at least 5 times where you seem to debate the info given, including the IRS resources directly. I give the links so that you can see for yourself. If you want to debate anyone on this, it would be your Congressmen or the IRS. If you want to learn the regulations and provisions, we've given those to you. If you want to comment on how that doesn't make sense, we've offered you some follow up ideas.