Can't figure out this error: "Return cannot be e filed when the sum of Illinois wages plus out of state wages on all W-2s does not equal total wages reported on IL schedule CR."

[ckarthiksriram]

Thanks @AmyC ! 

My situation is similar:

I am a resident of IL, and say traveled 36 days to CA in 2024; However, my company only considered 27 days of travel and attributed only that amount of my total income to CA. While I'm able to correct this and enter the appropriate non-IL sourced income when filing the IL returns, since this number does not match what's actually on my W2 (box 16), I am getting this e-file error.

Is the recommendation that I update the W2 manually with the corrected state income associated with each of IL and CA? The tax deducted of course wouldn't change, but the income attributed will.

Concrete example, just to elucidate:

income listed on W2: 100K; CA income 20K and IL income 80K.

My intended split: CA 25K and IL 75K.

Should I just update the W2 entry to reflect my intended split?

[MarilynG1]

Actually, it may be better tax-wise if less days are attributed to California on your W-2 than you calculate.  CA tax is most likely higher than Illinois tax. Also, if you change the CA wage amount, the CA tax amount will be higher, so you may owe tax to CA. 

However, you can change your W-2 entry to correct the salary amount allocated to CA; just be sure to save documentation as to why you did that, and how you calculated the amount. The IRS is fond of document-matching, so you could get an inquiry.

Here's more info on Allocating State Wages on  a W-2.

@ckarthiksriram 

[ckarthiksriram]

Thank You! I really appreciate it!

My company has a particular approach for tracking CA travel that uses the Nov 1 - Oct 31 timeframe, rather than Jan 1 - Dec 31 which is the tax year. I traveled 27 days between Jan 1 - Oct 31, and 9 more days after, which is what I've been wondering if I should report or not; My company says the 2025 W2 year will include these 9 days, so it will get tracked eventually.

The tax difference is marginal between the two, but I wasn't sure what the recommended approach is. I am leaning on going with the 36 days since I do have a way to support that number -- but would you recommend just sticking to whatever is on the W2 since it will reduce chance of getting flagged/rejected?

[KeshaH]

You can go either way. The simplest method would be sticking to what's on your W-2. If you make adjustments then you'll need to track it each year to ensure you're not counting amounts that have already been included.