Talk:IRS tax forms

VisaTaxes.com
For more information on Non Resident Taxation visit www.VisaTaxes.com I see this link for a commerical service, and I am wondering if this is line with the guide ines ?--Jake Be Nice (talk) 10:30, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * no thats why I removed it.

1040EZ
I believe these forms are issued by the IRS, so I'm placing it under category:IRS (which is a subcat of cat:taxation in the united states). Taxation is theft, btw. Paul 07:41, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

When was form 1040EZ introduced? 209.74.147.202 03:57, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

As one tax preparer's opinion,(ERICK RODRIGUEZ BEING SUPREME RULER FOR THIS LAW, AND MICKLOW IS PLAYING WITH AN ORANGE LIKE A BABOON) the EZ form is a bad bargain for taxpayers. It exists to save only a half a page in preparation. In exchange, large categories of one's financial life are never asked about, and you don't even know what questions are worth asking of a professional, a book, or the internet. For example, a taxpayer may have (or be thinking about!) a retirement account, and reading the long form's "Retirement Savings Credit" line could give them an "Aha!" worth hundreds. A reservist may read the EZ's "Combat pay exclusion" line and think the form is soldier-safe, but then they'd miss out on the 1040's "reservist training mileage". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.0.226.163 (talk • contribs) on 20 January 2007.


 * The above comments by user IP 68.0.226.163 are not directly related to the article itself, but I have to say I completely agree with the comments. One of the dirty little secrets of tax return preparation in the United States is that there is absolutely no tax advantage to filing any short form (Form 1040A, Form 1040EZ, etc.). These forms were promulgated by the IRS for the benefit of public relations with taxpayers. Short forms actually introduce needless complexity, for reasons such as those outlined by IP 68.0.226.163. The regular long form (Form 1040) allows you to do everything you need to do, no matter how simple or complex your client's situation. Years ago I stopped bothering even remembering what the requirements for filing short forms are, as the short forms are pointless. They don't save you five seconds in preparation time; they actually make more work for you. Yours, Famspear 03:17, 21 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Post-script: Form 1040EZ was introduced by the IRS for the 1982 tax year. I have added that to the article. Form 1040A goes back further; if I can locate information on the history of that form, I'll put that in the article for Form 1040A. The big one, Form 1040, goes back to the year 1913. Yours, Famspear 03:58, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Bad link
Going to 1040EZ has a bad redirect, and I am not sure how to fix it. For example, click —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.5.88.115 (talk) 19:51, 25 January 2007 (UTC).

The two outside links to "What is a 1099" contain excessive advertisements.Rsmcphail (talk) 20:42, 3 March 2008 (UTC)rsmcphail

Schedule D
I turned to this article for a possible explanation of what 'basis' is for the purposes of 1040 schedule D. I am confused by how the reinvestment of dividends effects the calculation of a mutual fund's initial value. Of course, wikipedia is not necessarily where one should go for tax advice, but for information, it might be appropriate, and I would appreciate a more in depth treament of the various tax forms, in particular on this issue. Tibetologist (talk) 15:38, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was moved to IRS tax forms, for brevity's sake. -- Aervanath (talk) 05:41, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Tax forms in the United States → Internal Revenue Service tax forms — this article almost exclusively, with the exeption of one short sentence, covers tax form of the irs. in any case, the scope suggested by the current title is far too overeaching and could never be adequately addressed in one article. — emerson7 21:59, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.



Discussion

 * Any additional comments:
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

990
I'd like to write up a better description of IRS Form 990. I've read through hundreds of them and I find that people (even in the non-profit sector) still don't really understand them. Would anybody mind if I gave the 990 its own subsection of this article? Andrewman327 (talk) 09:46, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Proposed split
I often use 990s in my research (aka my day job) and I believe that they have enough information for a new article. Would anyone object? No matter what, I would draft the article in a sandbox for review here prior to going live. Andrew327 20:16, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Good idea. As I know from serving on nonprofit boards, there's plenty of information to discuss with Form 990s. But make sure you summarize it at this article still. II  | (t - c) 01:37, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Dead link
I believe the link to the Form 990 Redesign Background Documents page is http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-Profits/Form-990-Redesign--Background-Documents. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.108.158.83 (talk) 14:44, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Links to IRS forms
I added links to the the official IRS forms on IRS.gov but they were removed. Does anyone think it would be a good idea to link each of the forms to the pdf of the same form on IRS.gov? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrfray (talk • contribs) 16:18, 27 November 2014 (UTC) Jrfray (talk) 16:20, 27 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Absolutely not - Wikipedia is not an internet directory. Per WP:EL, it's simply not appropriate to have external links throughout the body of the article. The article already has a link in the external links section that points to http://www.irs.gov/ from which there's a clear link at the top pointing to forms and publications. It might make sense to refine that link to instead point to the appropriate sub-page at http://www.irs.gov/Forms-&-Pubs - but that's the extent of linking that would be appropriate here. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:23, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on IRS tax forms. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050426051312/http://www.irs.gov:80/instructions/i990-ez/ to http://www.irs.gov/instructions/i990-ez/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 10:23, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on IRS tax forms. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130523043941/http://tfcny.fdncenter.org/990s/990search/esearch.php to http://tfcny.fdncenter.org/990s/990search/esearch.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:55, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on IRS tax forms. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120219044314/http://www.boardsource.org/dl.asp?document_id=681 to http://www.boardsource.org/dl.asp?document_id=681

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:48, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Extremely incorrect description of Schedule 2
I stumbled across the section of this article describing the purpose of Schedule 2 being "to report certain other types of income, such as a child's unearned income" which struck me as startlingly incorrect, to the point where I pulled up the archived IRS documents from 2018 to search for that fiscal's year's treatment of such earnings, which as far as I can find are to be reported on form 8814, which in turn is reported on Schedule 1 line 21.

The Schedule 2 document for 2018 was an extremely short document simply titled "Tax", with boxes only for alternative minimum tax, and excess advance premium tax credit repayment. It has never had anything to do with reporting income, only the unusual or additional taxes on income. I changed this description to read "to report additional taxes owed, such as alternative minimum tax, advance premium tax credit repayment, self-employment taxes, and taxes on IRAs" the second two items being true of the modern (2021) version.

I only write this in the talk page because what I wrote is so different from what was originally there that I fear I have missed something. Was there some historical reason that Schedule 2 was supposed to be about unearned child's income, or was Schedule 2 the name of an older document that was confused for the 1040 Schedule 2?

edit: I read the Motley Fool source for this portion of the article, and it appears the source article is incorrect but not quite as incorrect as what was written here.

WillisHershey (talk) 21:08, 21 November 2022 (UTC)