Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
No. of Recommendations: 0
(1) Re Form 5695 on "Residential Energy Credits." Part I is called "Nonbusiness Energy Property Credit" and concludes with line 11, and we are instructed to enter a number here and also on Form 1040, line 52.

But Part II of the same form ("Residential Energy Efficient Property Credit") goes from line 12 to line 27* where again we enter a number on Form 1040, line 52. My problem is that I get different numbers for these two parts and thus lines 11 and 27 are contradictory.

*Note: there's also a line 28, which deals with carryover, but I don't think that comes into it

I must be missing something. Maybe I'm only supposed to fill out one of these parts? I'm trying to get some credit for the installation of qualifying windows and doors in my home.

Also, when I'm filling out this form, I see a whole lot of lines that don't apply to me at all: e.g., solar energy property costs, solar water heating property costs, etc.

I can either leave those line blank or enter a zero. But later, I am supposed to use "the smaller" of some of thesis lines and my actual window expense: if I leave the original line blank, the my window expense is the only entry and there is no entry smaller than it; but if I enter zero, then that's the smaller. I'm supposing that the blank line is really the same as a zero, and is thus smaller.

(2) In figuring the taxable amount of social security benefits, I'm working from a SSA-1099 that DW received. One thing that struck us immediately is that the figure there is far in excess of the monthly payments that she has actually received from SS. They also say on that form that a certain dollar amount of the sum total was paid in 2010 for for 2009. We don't quite get that. All the paperwork I see about SS payments refers to lump-sums for a prior year -- so maybe that's what it was, except that DW doesn't remember receiving any lump sums. So maybe that's a false trail, and the amount was really spread out over all her 2010 payments. But it's still puzzling why the SSA-1099 should be so much higher than the sum of the checks that she actually received.


I'd greatly appreciate any help or insight with respect to either or both of these situations. TIA.

culcha
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
But it's still puzzling why the SSA-1099 should be so much higher than the sum of the checks that she actually received.

How about the amount deducted for Medicare Part B premiums?

Bob
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
How about the amount deducted for Medicare Part B premiums?

She doesn't have Part B though ... (Only A, which has no premiums).

culcha
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Did you hire a lawyer to help her get her benefits? Did some of the payments go there?

Dusty
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
(2) In figuring the taxable amount of social security benefits, I'm working from a SSA-1099 that DW received. One thing that struck us immediately is that the figure there is far in excess of the monthly payments that she has actually received from SS. They also say on that form that a certain dollar amount of the sum total was paid in 2010 for for 2009. We don't quite get that.

Have you checked deposits to the account to which she has her SS deposited? She may not remember, but it sounds like she received a lump sum payment in 2010 that included payments for 2009. Either because she requested payments retroactive to her full retirement age or due to a delay in processing.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
There might have been a delay in processing ...

We tried to check the account online, but the bank was recently acquired by another bank and the online system was changed. I couldn't check 2010, and then she tried, and she could figure it out either.

culcha
Print the post Back To Top
Advertisement