Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
No. of Recommendations: 0
How do i handle this situation: For 2000 I was a resident of UT, then CA. Like most states, they each calculate taxes based on the full year's income and then apportion according to the amounts actually earned in each state. So far so good.

When apportioning UT income the return asks to state how much of the total capital gains were realized while in UT (1st 1/2 of the year). In 2000 I had a net gain, but I had loses in CA (2nd half of year) That means my gain while in UT exceeds my net Federal Gain. It also means that my gain while in CA is negative.

So how do I habdle the apportionment? Do I actually use a negative CA number? Do I actually use UT number that exceeds the Federal number for the whole year?

Joe Varga
Print the post  


In accordance with IRS Circular 230, you cannot use the contents of any post on The Motley Fool's message boards to avoid tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state or local tax law provisions.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.