Money Matters
Dear Community,

Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.

If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.

Thank you.

Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.

Ideas on Taxes?

labrolabro member
Fifth Anniversary 500 Comments 250 Love Its Name Dropper
edited September 2016 in Money Matters
I just did a check on our 2016 annual taxes to make sure we didn't owe a bunch of money to the government at the end of the year. In 2015 we paid nearly $4k because we under-withheld. This year the IRS withholding calculator is saying we'll owe around $5k with the standard deduction or around the same amount as last year ($4k) if we itemize and make at least a $1k charitable contribution.

I guess I just don't know what we're doing wrong. We both increased our 401k contributions to meet the federal maximum for the year ($18k each) and I thought that would have reduced our tax liability enough in order to avoid this without having to withhold extra $$$.

So what can we do with just 3 months left in the year? We can update our w-4s to withhold a few hundred dollars extra apiece per paycheck...which sucks. It really bugs me that we can't keep with the Married + 0 on our w-4s and that isn't enough from the government's perspective. I just want to avoid paying another penalty again and I would PREFER to not write another large check on April 15th to the IRS if we can help it.
«1

Re: Ideas on Taxes?

  • I'm really surprised you owe while claiming Married 0! Do you have significant side income from a gigs or rentals? You can always check the box that says to withhold at the higher single rate....
  • I'm really surprised you owe while claiming Married 0! Do you have significant side income from a gigs or rentals? You can always check the box that says to withhold at the higher single rate....
    I KNOW! I think the problem is where our incomes fall since obviously our respective employers have no idea how much the other spouse makes. My husband makes significantly more than me and even in the married tax brackets, he falls in at a higher rate, while my income falls into a lower married tax bracket.

    We don't have any side jobs or gigs. Just our 9-5s. It's bull.
  • That seems even weirder - I thought when one spouse earned way more that the lower earning spouse helped keep the taxes down! 

    Do you have any other deductions you are missing that might help bring it down rather than taking the standard?
  • You need to have extra withheld throughout the year, or make estimated tax payments quarterly.  I'd definitely get it taken care of via W-4 now so you withhold enough to not owe a penalty on top of what you actually owe for taxes. 

    Looking at last year, did your income(s) increase?  Are you projected to withhold at least the amount of 2015's tax liability? 
  • Are you doing them yourself or do you have someone do them?  It may make sense to have a professional do them just to make sure you're not missing a deduction or something. You can change it to Single and zero to get more taken out or just have extra dollar amount taken out. Taxes can be very painful for DINKs. If you aren't already, putting money into a traditional IRA would also lower your taxable income. 
  • I agree w/ having a professional take a look at it, if you haven't already. Or, if you do have a professional doing it, get a second opinion.  I find it odd that you all would owe so much.  We're DINKs too, with a higher income than yours, and we only owed about $1600 last year, and that was due to some 1099 income I had in January of 2015 that I didn't pay quarterlies on.  I also didn't have my withholdings done correctly.  Our CPA told us if we both filed as married 0, we should be fine for 2016.  

    My only other guess is, you all don't have any student loan interest to write off, and you also probably don't have a ton of mortgage interest to write off since your mortgage is pretty low compared to your income.  But yeah, the tax codes sure aren't written to favor the higher earners (ie 100kish + a year) couples who don't have children.  
  • We are currently DINKS with a gross income of $120,000 (give or take).  We contribute 10% to our 401(k) and then max out our ROTHS (after tax of course).

    We deduct home office space for DH and me, our mortgage interest, some businesses expenses (DH has a small side business for web design) and charitable contributions and we usually get a pretty substantial refund.

    If you are both at Married + 0 I can't imagine that you would continually owe that much!  I would have a professional (not H&R Block but a CPA type person) do your taxes this year to make sure sure everything is correct.
    Formerly AprilH81
    photo composite_14153800476219jpg

  • @KAdams767  I think our incomes increased by about 5% for H and around 2.5% for me. So an increase, but not something crazy significant.

    @smerka @AprilZ81 @julieanne912 Yes, we had a professional CPA do our taxes last year after TurboTax told us we were going to owe. His number came out slightly less than TurboTax but he wasn't really able to find any mistakes or major savings for us. We made too much money at the time to deduct our student loan interest (which is gone now anyway). I shot him an email this afternoon after seeing the results on the withholding calculator to see if there was much we could do other than start contributing additional money towards our taxes.

    @smerka I don't think we qualify for a tax deductible tIRA. Our joint gross income is way way over the federal limit.

    I'm trying to think of anything else we could be missing. The last two years we've itemized rather than take the standard deduction and the itemization included -
    Taxes (state taxes and property tax)
    Interest (mortgage)

    We've never done significant charitable contributions because we've been so so focused on our debt payoff. We finally got to that point in July and I've started the discussion with my H about charity...he's not exactly enthusiastic about it but he understands why I want to do it. But we hadn't planned on starting anything regular until after we had met some additional savings goals early next year.

    Sorry for the novel but the only thing I can think that's dragging us down so much is that I'm putting 25% of my gross pay into a 401k in order to reach the federal annual max. I've put in around $4,700 in federal taxes to date, which seems kind of low.
  • Sorry I forgot about the lack of deduction for high incomes that are 401k eligible. I don't run into that very often. 
  • I'll be thinking of you if they start railing on rich people not paying enough in taxes tonight during the debate. 
  • smerka said:
    I'll be thinking of you if they start railing on rich people not paying enough in taxes tonight during the debate. 
    LOL! I mean, I honestly don't have a PROBLEM with what we pay in taxes every year...I just really really wish that us putting M + 0 on our W-4s was enough and we didn't run into not withholding enough throughout the year. It just irritates me that I have to figure out what the additional amount is going to be and withhold that as well in order to not run into penalties and a big check to Uncle Sam.
  • Well, ideally you could have seen what you owed last year and divided that amount by the number of pay periods left and withheld that much extra from each pay period throughout the year.  That's the best way to calculate to at least avoid the under withholding penalty (to ensure you withhold at least as much this year as your liability last year).  I have to withhold a lot extra from my pay each period because I make more than 3 times what DH makes - the IRS withholding calculator is archaic and was set up for single earners in the first place, so it only works almost exactly when two incomes are identical or close to it.  Personally, I check the IRS tax tables for the prior year, get a good estimate of our taxable income based on last year and any changes that I'm aware of, and make sure that we are withholding that amount divided by the number of pay periods we have.  

    How much were you contributing to 401(k) in 2015?  It's possible that the increase bringing you to the max wasn't enough to offset what you owed, plus the increase in income.  401(k) isn't a dollar-for-dollar decrease in tax liability, it's only going to decrease your liability by the value of your effective tax rate.  So if you owed $4k, and put $4k more I'm 401(k), the potential decrease in your tax liability is more like $4,000 times 20-28%.  So to offset $4k owed, you'd need to increase 401(k) by $16k, roughly.  And then you'd need to account for any increased income or decreased deductions.    
  • labrolabro member
    Fifth Anniversary 500 Comments 250 Love Its Name Dropper
    edited September 2016
    @KAdams767 Last year I put in 10k and H put in around 8k. I guess I figured such a significant jump would lower our MAGI enough to balance everything out but it definitely seems to have not made a difference here.

    ETA Your calculation really is helpful! It makes a bit more sense why we still owe even with such a significant increase in pre tax retirement savings.
  • I'd think you'd be closer to breaking even than you are, given those numbers.  I assume you did, but when you ran the calculator, did you use the decreased gross income after the new 401(k) deduction?
  • If it makes you feel any better, we have a similar problem.  Last two years we've owed money.  The first year was my fault.  I claimed married with all the relevant withholding deductions as I was the only one working.  About 6 months later, my wife found a job the same time we found out she was pregnant.  So I made the decision not to change our withholding as I wanted the big refund after we got the dependent deduction.  Unfortunately, in the excitement, I forgot about the job.  Needless to say, we were about $2k short and had to pay a $12 penalty.

    So we fixed the withholding.  Now we're both married+0.  Still owed $458 to feds, but got $260 or so back from state.

    I'm waiting to see how this year plays out, but I suspect we'll owe again as my wife and I are severely lopsided and neither is taking enough out on their own.  I hate the idea of taking any more out of her checks as they're small enough already, so it'll probably end up coming out of mine.  It's also easier to do from mine since I can do it online.

    I've debated doing married, but withhold at the single rate, but like you said, you just shouldn't have to do it.

    I looked into increasing the 401k, but as you've found out, it doesn't work the way you think it should.  I ran into an article explaining in once, but can't find it at the moment.

    We'll also have the problem soon that our deductions won't be enough to keep us above the standard deduction. :(

    Daisypath Anniversary tickers
  • labrolabro member
    Fifth Anniversary 500 Comments 250 Love Its Name Dropper
    edited September 2016
    @KAdams767 No, the withholding calculator asks you to enter in your total expected gross for the year...mostly easy since we're salaried, then there is a line item for any bonuses, and then a line item for the total expected contribution to any pre-tax retirement plans. I guess it will be something to figure out with our CPA at tax time. I thought adjusting our 401k contributions would definitely put us there and we're not.

    @jtmh2012 That really sucks regarding your itemizations! :( I think I'd be ok with a few hundred dollars owed...but I'd rather get closer to nothing owed, nothing refunded. Our first year we filed as married we had only been married for part of the year and we got a massive refund so H and I were like "OH, this is the married tax benefit everyone talks about", and we proceeded to change nothing other than increasing our 401ks a bit and making sure our W-4s reflected Married. So then the first full year of being married was 2015 and when we filed we were hit with a whopper of a bill! Based on my apparently flawed assumptions, I figured adjusting our 401ks to max them out would fix the problem. Apparently it didn't.

    Anyway, I adjusted my W-4 to withhold an additional $600 per paycheck for the remainder of the year and I think this will bring us closer. It really sucks...my take home per check is around $1650 and I feel like I'm basically working for free. I went and re-checked the calculator doing a better estimate of what our itemizations will be and came up with a total tax bill of $3600 and some change.
  • @labro: there's a box on page 2 that asks "Check box if you or your spouse contributed to a tax-deferred retirement plan this year."  If you click that, on the next page you'll have a field called "Enter your total 2016 contribution to a tax-deferred retirement plan:"
    Daisypath Anniversary tickers
  • @jthmh2012 Yep, did that. It totally calculated in our $36,000 total contribution and we're still stuck with this amount.
  • jtmh2012jtmh2012 mod
    Moderator Eighth Anniversary 2500 Comments 500 Love Its
    edited September 2016

    Finally found the link I was looking for:

    https%3A%2F%2Fanswers.yahoo.com%2Fquestion%2Findex%3Fqid%3D20100703220136AAF0BhK&usg=AFQjCNHhm42qZw0XJnEJoKF2_AXUz_CO0A&sig2=boRoXnCAjKXAe3akgBgN6w

    Basically, the explanation being that increasing your 401k contributions decreases your income, but also decreases the amount withheld.  So unless you're right on the edge of a tax bracket, it doesn't help.

    Daisypath Anniversary tickers
  • smerka said:
    I'll be thinking of you if they start railing on rich people not paying enough in taxes tonight during the debate. 
    Not to start anything, but when they talk about "rich people" paying their fair share, they're not talking about DINKs who make a combined income in the 100k range.  
  • smerka said:
    I'll be thinking of you if they start railing on rich people not paying enough in taxes tonight during the debate. 
    Not to start anything, but when they talk about "rich people" paying their fair share, they're not talking about DINKs who make a combined income in the 100k range.  
    That is true, but it also depends on your perspective.  To a family working to support themselves and their 2 kids on $30-40k "rich" would be making $100k.  To those in the $100k "rich" is $250k and so on.
    Formerly AprilH81
    photo composite_14153800476219jpg

  • AprilZ81 said:
    smerka said:
    I'll be thinking of you if they start railing on rich people not paying enough in taxes tonight during the debate. 
    Not to start anything, but when they talk about "rich people" paying their fair share, they're not talking about DINKs who make a combined income in the 100k range.  
    That is true, but it also depends on your perspective.  To a family working to support themselves and their 2 kids on $30-40k "rich" would be making $100k.  To those in the $100k "rich" is $250k and so on.
    Oh I know, I'm just saying, the "rich" they talk about on TV is not people like us.  
  • AprilZ81 said:
    smerka said:
    I'll be thinking of you if they start railing on rich people not paying enough in taxes tonight during the debate. 
    Not to start anything, but when they talk about "rich people" paying their fair share, they're not talking about DINKs who make a combined income in the 100k range.  
    That is true, but it also depends on your perspective.  To a family working to support themselves and their 2 kids on $30-40k "rich" would be making $100k.  To those in the $100k "rich" is $250k and so on.
    Oh I know, I'm just saying, the "rich" they talk about on TV is not people like us.  
    The more I learn about consumption based taxes the more I'm in favor of drastic changes to our tax code.  It is way, way, WAY too complicated with too many exemptions and loopholes.

    Donald Trump was right in my opinion when he said he was "smart" to not pay any taxes by taking advantage of the current tax code.  He earned that money and just because he makes more than most doesn't mean that he needs to pay more than others.

    A consumption tax doesn't tax on income, but what you spend.  You buy a brand new car?  You pay taxes to the federal government.  You buy a used car?  Taxes are already paid from the original transaction.  Those with higher incomes and bigger spending habits will naturally pay more in taxes than those with lower incomes so it will tax the "rich".

    The plans I've seen carve out that necessities (food) wouldn't be taxed and all taxpayers would receive an exemption on the first X number of dollars spent before a tax would kick in.
    Formerly AprilH81
    photo composite_14153800476219jpg

  • AprilZ81 said:
    smerka said:
    I'll be thinking of you if they start railing on rich people not paying enough in taxes tonight during the debate. 
    Not to start anything, but when they talk about "rich people" paying their fair share, they're not talking about DINKs who make a combined income in the 100k range.  
    That is true, but it also depends on your perspective.  To a family working to support themselves and their 2 kids on $30-40k "rich" would be making $100k.  To those in the $100k "rich" is $250k and so on.
    It also depends on where you live. The federal government taxes that $100k the same in Boston as it does in a little midwestern town even though the true value of that money is wildly different. 
  • I always have to remind myself to not be mad at the people who don't pay taxes (I was one for a couple years) but rather the screwed up tax code. 
  • jtmh2012 said:

    Finally found the link I was looking for:

    https%3A%2F%2Fanswers.yahoo.com%2Fquestion%2Findex%3Fqid%3D20100703220136AAF0BhK&usg=AFQjCNHhm42qZw0XJnEJoKF2_AXUz_CO0A&sig2=boRoXnCAjKXAe3akgBgN6w

    Basically, the explanation being that increasing your 401k contributions decreases your income, but also decreases the amount withheld.  So unless you're right on the edge of a tax bracket, it doesn't help.

    Our MAGI last year did put us close to the edge...or at least close enough that I thought the 401k change would do it...but that was because I thought it was a dollar for dollar decrease in our liability and not a percentage. So it makes sense now why this happened.
  • AprilZ81 said:
    AprilZ81 said:
    smerka said:
    I'll be thinking of you if they start railing on rich people not paying enough in taxes tonight during the debate. 
    Not to start anything, but when they talk about "rich people" paying their fair share, they're not talking about DINKs who make a combined income in the 100k range.  
    That is true, but it also depends on your perspective.  To a family working to support themselves and their 2 kids on $30-40k "rich" would be making $100k.  To those in the $100k "rich" is $250k and so on.
    Oh I know, I'm just saying, the "rich" they talk about on TV is not people like us.  
    The more I learn about consumption based taxes the more I'm in favor of drastic changes to our tax code.  It is way, way, WAY too complicated with too many exemptions and loopholes.

    Donald Trump was right in my opinion when he said he was "smart" to not pay any taxes by taking advantage of the current tax code.  He earned that money and just because he makes more than most doesn't mean that he needs to pay more than others.

    A consumption tax doesn't tax on income, but what you spend.  You buy a brand new car?  You pay taxes to the federal government.  You buy a used car?  Taxes are already paid from the original transaction.  Those with higher incomes and bigger spending habits will naturally pay more in taxes than those with lower incomes so it will tax the "rich".

    The plans I've seen carve out that necessities (food) wouldn't be taxed and all taxpayers would receive an exemption on the first X number of dollars spent before a tax would kick in.


    Another benefit of a consumption tax is we'd snag all those people who make money under the table and either pay no income tax or don't pay enough income tax.  And certainly a good sized group of those people are criminals.  Who make their money illegally (ie drugs, theft, trafficking) so they can't report it.

    I don't think Donald Trump made the point he wanted to, at least for me.  While I don't blame him for taking advantage of whatever tax loopholes he can, we all do that.  At the same time, when one of the richest men in the world is gloating about how he pays no taxes, that is screaming alarm bells about how completely and totally messed up our tax code and tax system is.

  • I'm pretty sure you can file income taxes even if the money was earned doing something illegal. A prostitute becomes an entertainer, drug dealer - pharmaceutical sales, etc.  but yes consumption tax would help this problem. 
  • smerka said:
    I'm pretty sure you can file income taxes even if the money was earned doing something illegal. A prostitute becomes an entertainer, drug dealer - pharmaceutical sales, etc.  but yes consumption tax would help this problem. 
    Yes, you can report income but a lot of people (especially those getting cash through illegal activities) won't report under the table income.
    Formerly AprilH81
    photo composite_14153800476219jpg

  • There used to be a line on the normal 1040 form that said something like "income from illegal sources".  I remember asking who the heck would ever admit to that?
    Daisypath Anniversary tickers
Sign In or Register to comment.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards