|
#1
| |||
| |||
| bem wrote: - quote - > Has California changed how to file if one spouse is
Yes the law changed to conform to the Servicemembers Civil> military, domiciled in another state but the other spouse > works in California? > I am only aware of two options in this situation. Married > filing separately for California even if they filed joint > for federal. Or Married filing joint using a California > part year return. > My client is saying that there is a new law where California > can not use the non resident military wages to increase > taxes though. Am I missing something? Relief Act. It is all explained in FTB PUB 1032: http://www.ftb.ca.gov/forms/04_forms/04_1032pub.pdf -- Alan http://taxtopics.net << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
| | |||
| |||
| bem wrote: - quote - > Has California changed how to file if one spouse is
Yes, your client is right, there is a change that affects> military, domiciled in another state but the other spouse > works in California? > I am only aware of two options in this situation. Married > filing separately for California even if they filed joint > for federal. Or Married filing joint using a California > part year return. > My client is saying that there is a new law where California > can not use the non resident military wages to increase > taxes though. Am I missing something? 2004 returns. It is the result of the 2003 re-enactment of the Soldiers and Sailors Civil Relief Act of 1940 (now called the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act of 2003, HR 100), which precludes the states from including the military compensation of nonresident members in any way in the calculating of state tax liability. Under the old rules, if a married couple with one nonresident military and one resident civilian spouse filed a joint California return, the military compensation of the nonresident member was included in the total taxable income calculation. The result would ordinarily be to increase the average rate at which the California income was taxed. Under the new federal law, the nonresident member's military compensation cannot be taken into account. The result ordinarily is to reduce the average rate at which the California income is taxed. California conformed to the federal change in 2004, effective for all open years. If military compensation was used in calculating total tax for any open year, a claim for refund may be filed. The FTB requests that the amended return be marked "HR 100" in red at the top, and that a daytime phone number be provided. In preparing 2004 returns, military compensation of a nonresident member spouse should not be included in the 540NR total income calculation, whether MFS or MFJ. I confess I haven't looked (don't do any compliance work myself), but I'd have thought this would be covered in the 2004 Form 540NR instructions. Katie in San Diego The foregoing is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal or professional advice. << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#-1
| |||
| |||
| Has California changed how to file if one spouse is military, domiciled in another state but the other spouse works in California? I am only aware of two options in this situation. Married filing separately for California even if they filed joint for federal. Or Married filing joint using a California part year return. My client is saying that there is a new law where California can not use the non resident military wages to increase taxes though. Am I missing something? Beth M. << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
| Tags |
| california, millitary |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Forum | Replies | Last Post | |
| MSA-to-HSA: California tax Jay: California doesn't conform with federal provisions for HSAs. It looks like they're taxing an MSA-to-HSA rollover twice: - income tax (schedule CA... | Taxes | 6 | 03-21-2005 05:42 AM | |
| California Resident or Not? A. G. Kalman: The following case was recently decided by the CA Courts of Appeal for the 2nd District (Los Angeles & Ventura). I'm posting it here because it... | Taxes | 4 | 08-19-2004 09:02 PM | |
| Tax & Suvivorship, California Paul M. White: I'm beneficiary to a will of a 75 yr. woman. We've not married and been together 8 years. I'm 60,not related. She purposely named and left her... | Taxes | 6 | 08-10-2004 09:03 AM | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |