UI Exclusion fix

[The-Tax-Lady]

Did today's update provide the fix for Unemployment, Intuit's estimated date. I don't see it or I don't understand the procedure, if there is one. Thank you, I hesitated to post a UI question. 🙂

[IRonMaN]

It was scheduled for this afternoon sometime ------------------- and in Intuit's eyes, it's always afternoon somewhere.

[Just-Lisa-Now-]

Latest Update: We expect an update to ProSeries on Thursday, March 18, 2021 in the afternoon to address changes for federal returns. For more details see Generating the Unemployment Compensation Exclusion in ProSeries.

*************

[qbteachmt]

"I hesitated to post a UI question."

Oh, you're late; the counter is already spinning.

[bbgunn177]

Hope that they also handle the states that have exempted UI as well.  Unfortunately ie. for the State of Maryland there is a $100K for Married Filing Joint but no limit on UI vs Fed of $10,200.  So messed up and may returns waiting for a software update to finish.

[sjrcpa]

MD passed their UI exclusion way before the federal one. But MD still hadn't released the LU form for this when the federal law passed. Even if MD was working on it they are going to have to start over now since MD starts with federal AGI. 

At least MD extended everything until July 15.

[The-Tax-Lady]

Ohio has bills in the General Assembly to conform to the IRS changes but who knows how long that will take to pass, if it does.

Ohio starts with the AGI also and let's not forget the School Districts. Just keeps getting better and better.

[sffdib]

I saw some posting on UI exclusions for MFJ in community property states such as CA. My program is only excluding $10,200. I read somewhere that it was supposed to exclude double for taxpayers making below $150,000.

[qbteachmt]

I was going to mention that you saw a Lacerte update, but I also see you already started your own topic and mentioned that before you also posted here. To help peer volunteers not have to chase all the duplicates, your original topic is this link:

https://proconnect.intuit.com/community/proseries-tax-discussions/discussion/ab-80-for-california/00...

No need to keep asking inside of other topics, too. Thanks.

[sffdib]

The above responses did not answer my question if we deduct $10,200 or $20,400 from UI for CA taxpayer on the Federal return and steps in ProSeries. I know that UI is not taxable on CA return so it des not matter. On May 6, there was Spidell flash email 2021-35 which stats that since UI benefits is a community property state are split equally between both spouses each spouse may claim up to $10,200 exclusion even though one spouse received the benefits. My question, what are the steps in ProSeries to adjust for the additional $10,200?

[Just-Lisa-Now-]

its $10,200 per person.

[sffdib]

Thanks Lisa, how to enter it in ProSeries. Now it is only deducting $10,200. 

[dkh]

$10,200 per person - meaning each person that received unemployment.  On Federal return you cannot split one persons unemployment to deduct $20,400 for MFJ

[sffdib]

Hi dkh, this is not what I am reading from other boards. This is specific to community property States and the conversations started on May 6. In my clients' case it is specific to CA due to community property rules but thank you for trying to help. 

[dkh]

Why would community property states receive different treatment on federal returns than any other state?

That makes no sense.   The state return may be calculated differently but certainly not the federal

[sffdib]

I am not making this up. Subscribe to Spidell and follow the conversations there. The only reason I am posting on this board is to see how is ProSeries going to handle this adjustment. By the way this is not only for California, they posted the names of 9 other States. You can also check out Calhoun vs. Commissioner (1992) 64 TC 222 - MFJ - $20,400 UI exclusion case. 

[qbteachmt]

Right now, the issue seems to revolve around "Received" vs "Deemed to have received by virtue of having a community property interest or right to" the UI income. It's clearly up to the preparer to decide which stand to take on MFJ, because the IRS has not stated how they understand the exclusion wording to be applied. MFS is identified.