They're the same thing. The EV credits are not subject to the AMT but the EVSE credits are. If the EV credits take the tax owed below the AMT amount then to that extent the EVSE credits are lost. In this sense the EV credit kills the EVSE credits.mwalsh said:
2011 TAX TIME Questions
- Thread starter Venk
- Start date
Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:
planet4ever
Well-known member
I agree with your implied sarcasm, but I think my point may not have completely sunk in yet. No matter how little income you have, if you try to take the EVSE credit you are forced to calculate the AMT. For low income people the AMT would undoubtedly be less than the standard tax, but it is extremely unlikely to be $7,500 less than the standard tax. Therefore, no EVSE credit if you are taking an EV credit.thankyouOB said:
Of course real "low income" folks pay less than $7,500 in income tax (though they may pay more than that when you include SS). Those people can't even take the full EV credit. But consider a single man with $50,000 taxable income. He would normally pay $8,631 in income tax, typically all taken out of paychecks so he doesn't see it. After getting the full EV tax credit he would end up still paying $1,131, but he won't get a penny of that back as an EVSE tax credit because his AMT would probably be at least $7,000.
Ray
Not to change the subject or anything, but our 2011 refund is now safely in the bank (or "pending" as Wells Fargo likes to say for at least a day). Turbotax worked well 
, except for not explaining why we did not get the EVSE credit.
, except for not explaining why we did not get the EVSE credit.
vin944 said:
Yes, there is a place where you were asked about the fueling station. I believe it was the next set of questions after you entered the information for the tax credit on the LEAF.
OK Thanks I will go back and try to find that tomorrow. Back to the thread topic, I will assume the $2500 is a rebate deemed non taxable since i did not receive a 1099. But you know what is taxable in CA? Figure this out!!! Your prior year state refund. Isn't that money you already paid tax on? I got a 1099-G that says I have to report my state tax refund as income. WTH.
planet4ever
Well-known member
Of course you do, because that is money you should have paid tax on last year, but didn't. Let's say you told the IRS a year ago that you had paid $5000 in state income tax to California during 2010 through payroll deductions (or however). Form 1040 Schedule A said, OK, we will deduct $5000 from your income for 2010, and you won't have to pay tax on that. But then the state comes back and says you overpaid $1000. Now the IRS is going to say, hey, you said $5000, and it was only $4000. You lied to us. You have to pay tax on the $1000 that you falsely claimed was deductible.vin944 said:
(OK, so I made up the "lied" part. They know that sometimes happens, and you probably weren't intentionally misleading them, so they aren't going to charge you any penalties. But it really is income from 2010 that you didn't report as income a year ago, and did receive during 2011.)
Ray
OK I'm trying to follow you on this one. This money was simply withheld from my check and is part of my AGI. Correct me if I'm wrong but you are saying that somehow I was not taxed federally on my state income tax withheld box 17 the prior year? If that is the case then I can see you are only taxed once and not twice. Can you tell me where on 1040 A I made this estimate.
Tax stuff is hard to follow so I'm giving it my best. IRS should be glad I let the state hold that much for a year. They make money on it.
Tax stuff is hard to follow so I'm giving it my best. IRS should be glad I let the state hold that much for a year. They make money on it.
lpickup
Well-known member
vin944 said:
No, it's money that you DIDN'T pay tax on because it was taken out of your paycheck PRE-TAX.
I'm learning here Thank You. It does appear that the difference between box 3 and box 1 does include box 17. I usually assumed the difference to just be 401k, etc. When I take my 401k contributions and add them to the state withheld I get a little more than the difference between box 3 and 1. But close so something is still a little off. I will go back to last years 1040 A and see if I can figure it out.
Actually after further examination the difference between box 3 and box 1 is exactly my 401k contributions. So I am not seeing where the state withheld box 17 is not included in my AGI.
But back to the thread, I am not planning on putting the $2500 rebate as income in turbotax. Hopefully this deep into the thread, this is still the general consensus. Thanks.
But back to the thread, I am not planning on putting the $2500 rebate as income in turbotax. Hopefully this deep into the thread, this is still the general consensus. Thanks.
lpickup
Well-known member
vin944 said:
It's been awhile since I actually looked at tax forms (I just use software now).
Did you itemize your deductions last year? If you did, then you were allowed to deduct your state taxes paid from your income. This IS after your AGI calculation though, but before your tax is figured. So it doesn't lower your AGI, but you didn't pay taxes on it either.
If you DIDN'T itemize deductions (and because you mentioned 1040A I think this might be the case) then you did pay tax on that money, but then you also aren't required to claim your state refund (at least according to my tax software and my interpretation of the IRS forms).
Consult a tax professional for further guidance.
Thanks for the info. I use turbotax and I know from last year it generated 72 pages of crud. I did attempt to sift through it but accounting is not among my strongest skills to say the least. I did enter my state refund into this years turbotax. I managed to add the Leaf and get the $7500, which I will not even be able to take advantage of even half that.
I guess I am still on the fence about the $2500 CA rebate. Per the guts of this thread, I am leaning toward not entering that as income in turbotax. Any final input on that is as always, greatly appreciated. Thanks.
I guess I am still on the fence about the $2500 CA rebate. Per the guts of this thread, I am leaning toward not entering that as income in turbotax. Any final input on that is as always, greatly appreciated. Thanks.
planet4ever
Well-known member
That's almost exactly right. The only thing you missed is that if vin944 filed 1040A last year, he absolutely did not itemize, because you can't itemize when you use that form.lpickup said:
So, vin, you can ignore that 1099-G you got. Presumably you have to use Form 1040 instead this year. Line 10 on that form is where you would report your state refund, but the instructions for that line say specifically
You fit case (a).
The truth is I am still on the fence myself, but definitely leaning to the side that says it isn't income. I'm trying to get a solid answer from the IRS.vin944 said:
I hear you. I have tried a couple of tax programs in the past, and "crud" describes my reaction well. That's one reason why I use the IRS forms directly. The other reason is that I like to understand what is going on behind the curtain.vin944 said:
Ray
Hey Thanks Ray. I will take a closer look at this 1099-G and probably call the IRS myself. If I come up with something solid about the $2500 from them I will post immediately.
BTW looking through last year's 72 pages I see kinda at the beginning Form 1040 (2pages) then Schedule A (1page) Schedule C (2pages), etc. I think I found it schedule A box 5a. It has my state with help in there from last year.
Thanks for helping.
Vin
BTW looking through last year's 72 pages I see kinda at the beginning Form 1040 (2pages) then Schedule A (1page) Schedule C (2pages), etc. I think I found it schedule A box 5a. It has my state with help in there from last year.
Thanks for helping.
Vin
This is not a hard decision if you consider the possible outcomes. If you treat the rebate as income you are 100% certain that you'll pay tax on it because you are guaranteed they aren't going to tell you that your treatment was wrong. On the other hand, if you don't treat it as income then (a) they accept the treatment or (b) they don't accept the treatment. If (b) the worst that happens is that you treat it as income. Consequently not treating it as income can yield a better result but in no circumstance will it yield a worse result.planet4ever said:
This ignores interest but that is not consequential and penalties would not be applicable.
planet4ever
Well-known member
I spent an hour and twenty five minutes on hold this afternoon listening to a 75 second loop of very boring and horrible quality music. That included one transfer to a second queue and an attempted transfer to a third queue, at which point I objected. After I explained why, the lady I was speaking with did some research, and concluded that if I did not get a 1099-G for my CA CRVP rebate then I would not have to report it as income.
I didn't, so I wont, but I did keep her ID number just in case.
Ray
I didn't, so I wont, but I did keep her ID number just in case.
Ray
linkim
Well-known member
planet4ever said:
Ray,
Thanks for your patience in spending quality time with the IRS. I plan to follow your lead when I file my federal tax with TurboTax.
Kim
hill
Well-known member
link?SanDust said:
One thing IS for certain, if you pay $38K-ish for your EV .... then get a $5K state rebate, the (depreciable) basis for (Fed) business purposes is $5K off the top. What's funny, in a sick sort of way for us is that our businesses are incorporated, and we zero out profit via payroll, dividends, and expenses. Let's see me use THAT $7,500 now
:lol:
Hindsight - it's almost always 20/20. Sure wishin' right now we hadn't purchased the Leaf under our biz identity .
This is a practical answer -- without a 1099 there is no record of your receiving anything so they won't know about it -- but you'd never get a 1099-G for a CARB rebate. A 1099-G has to do with state taxes which were paid in a previous year and then refunded. The CARB rebate is completely different. FWIW nothing changes if they tell you the wrong thing. Helps with penalties but this would not be a penalty type situation anyway.planet4ever said:
It depends on whether you count it as income. If you do then the basis would be $38K. If not then it would be $33K. Doesn't matter since it's a wash, though there is a timing difference. As for leasing being a good idea, not sure if this was you or not, but someone mentioned last year that their company was going to lease a Leaf for them. My suggestion was to have the employee lease the car, take the rebate, and then be reimbursed at the standard $.55/mile rate. The company gets to take the deduction and the employee doesn't recognize any income. Works great since the cost of running the Leaf isn't anywhere near $.55/mile. In fact 500 miles a month at $.55/mile should just about cover the costs (after CARB rebate).hill said:
Similar threads
