Discussion:In AMT but receiving minimum tax credit...???
From TaxAlmanac
| Revision as of 21:29, 8 March 2008 CalifCPA (Talk | contribs) (New rules this y) ← Previous diff |
Current revision OR Taxman (Talk | contribs) (I have looked at) |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
| {{ForumReplyPost|UserID=CalifCPA|Date=8 March 2008|Text=New rules this year. If the client has minimum tax carryforwards from years prior to 2004, he is entitled to a refundable minimum tax credit - even if he is in an alt min position in the current year.}} | {{ForumReplyPost|UserID=CalifCPA|Date=8 March 2008|Text=New rules this year. If the client has minimum tax carryforwards from years prior to 2004, he is entitled to a refundable minimum tax credit - even if he is in an alt min position in the current year.}} | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{ForumReplyPost|UserID=OR Taxman|Date=31 March 2008|Text=I have looked at many sources, including the instructions for 8801 and various tax research sources, but I'm still suspicious about a result I am getting on a 2007 return. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Client appears to be entitled to Min Tax Credit on 8801, from AMT created in 2003; but AMT in 2003 does not appear to have been created by "deferral" items, e.g. - ISOs, depr diffs. Is this possible? | ||
| + | |||
| + | As I read and follow 8801, the form does not appear to calculate the MTC based on actual deferral items; rather, part 1 appears to calculate the AMT that results from exclusion items. Then Part II compares this to the actual AMT included on the return. This leads me to believe that all other AMT then is created by what would be considered "deferral" items. | ||
| + | |||
| + | In reviewing the 2003 Form 6251 and the calculation in Part 1 of the 2004 Form 8801, the other difference appears to be that Part 1 of 8801 does not take into consideration the AMT exemption phaseout (on line 5) when calculating AMT that results from exclusion items. This difference in the calculations (versus the 2003 AMT calculation) appears to make the 2003 AMT a result of "deferral" items. Is this difference really a "deferral" item? I do not see that on any chart that shows exclusion vs deferral items. It does not seem like a "timing" difference... | ||
| + | |||
| + | Would you say then that this amount then would qualify for the refundable MTC in 2007? YIKES MY BRAIN HURTS! (I did mean to literally yell.)}} | ||
Current revision
Discussion Forum Index --> Advanced Tax Questions --> In AMT but receiving minimum tax credit...???
Discussion Forum Index --> Tax Questions --> In AMT but receiving minimum tax credit...???
| 8 March 2008 | |
| Using LaCerte..... I have several clients who are in AMT but are receiving the minimum tax credit. I thought the minimum tax credit could only be applied when a client was not in AMT. There are no diagnostics generated by LaCerte regarding this. I called LaCerte and they have no idea. The minimum tax credit is being carried forward from prior years. Anyone know what's going on here? | |
| 8 March 2008 | |
| then fill out your profile
This was all covered in this year's CPE classes. | |
| 8 March 2008 | |
| New rules this year. If the client has minimum tax carryforwards from years prior to 2004, he is entitled to a refundable minimum tax credit - even if he is in an alt min position in the current year. | |
| 31 March 2008 | |
| I have looked at many sources, including the instructions for 8801 and various tax research sources, but I'm still suspicious about a result I am getting on a 2007 return.
Client appears to be entitled to Min Tax Credit on 8801, from AMT created in 2003; but AMT in 2003 does not appear to have been created by "deferral" items, e.g. - ISOs, depr diffs. Is this possible? As I read and follow 8801, the form does not appear to calculate the MTC based on actual deferral items; rather, part 1 appears to calculate the AMT that results from exclusion items. Then Part II compares this to the actual AMT included on the return. This leads me to believe that all other AMT then is created by what would be considered "deferral" items. In reviewing the 2003 Form 6251 and the calculation in Part 1 of the 2004 Form 8801, the other difference appears to be that Part 1 of 8801 does not take into consideration the AMT exemption phaseout (on line 5) when calculating AMT that results from exclusion items. This difference in the calculations (versus the 2003 AMT calculation) appears to make the 2003 AMT a result of "deferral" items. Is this difference really a "deferral" item? I do not see that on any chart that shows exclusion vs deferral items. It does not seem like a "timing" difference... Would you say then that this amount then would qualify for the refundable MTC in 2007? YIKES MY BRAIN HURTS! (I did mean to literally yell.) | |
