I entered a 1099R for my wife's retirement income and the next screen told me she was 72 in 2020 in reference to RMD's. That is not correct; her birthdate is entered correctly on the personal info page. I'm concerned that this error will affect other functions in TT.
The Cares Act brought about suspension of required minimum distributions (RMD) for tax year 2020 for those reaching age 72, or age 70 1/2 for years before 2020. That is where the age 72 number is being referenced with relation to the RMD question. The Cares Act changes gave taxpayers over the age of 70 1/2 to repay back into their IRAs any RMD taken in 2020 if done by 8/31/20. TurboTax is correctly referencing your wife's age in the info section.
Click Here for more information on The Cares Act and RMDs
The page in question clearly stated: "(wife's name) was 72 years old in 2020" which is incorrect. Someone needs to correct the code that resulted in this miscalculation. That error could result in another miscalculation somewhere farther along in my return.
Thank you. I will pass this information along to the respective department.
I spent about 2 hours on the phone yesterday with the same error. Turbotax is displaying the same error below to me. It is claiming that my wife was 72 in 2022 when, in fact, she will be 72 in 2023. Her birth date is entered correctly in the product. I tried to convince the customer service agents that this is a software bug to no avail. Here is the evidence: After receiving the incorrect message I changed my wife's birth date to make her much younger and went through to 1099 sequence again resulting in the same bogus error message. I restored her birth date to the correct date and changed my birth date to make me much younger (I am 73). I then went through the 1099 sequence again and, viola, the problem went away. Finally, I restored my birth date and reran the 1099 sequence one last time. The problem now recurred. The inescapable conclusion is that Turbotax is using my birth date to calculate my wife's RMD liability. Of course, I could not get this information to anyone (i.e., software engineer) who could actually locate the bug in the code and fix this problem in a subsequent release. I repeat, this issue is not a misunderstanding of the tax rules on my part. It is a BUG in the product. Can anyone provide me with the means to get this escalated to the technical folks who can fix it?
Since I created this thread 2 years ago, I haven't followed it. And I wasn't aware that it was still an issue. How disappointing. I also switched since then from Deluxe to Premier. I wonder if there's a difference?
Should have said "error message above" not "below" in my post. First time posting here.
I hope someone in the organization will confirm that the Premier product has the fix and I will change as well. Thanks for the suggestion.
@JCFABF What it sounds like to me is if you entered a 1099R and assigned it to the wrong spouse. Did she get any 1099R? Check your 1099R and make sure it's listed under your name. I would delete all the 1099R and re enter them manually. That usually clears things like this out.
I wonder now if, in fact, your wife is now subject to RMDs in which case the problem is moot for you. In fact I just have to get by this one year and it will be moot for me as well as my wife will be 72 this year. So maybe Premier still has the problem but you no longer have the situation that manifests it. Hope someone in Intuit can clarify.
The 1099 is associated with my wife, not me. The error message clearly indicates her name. My RMD situation is handled properly by TT.
Yes, since I started this thread, we've both aged into RMD's even with the newer age limits.
I am unable to reproduce this symptom. TurboTax CD/download and online versions both seem to behave correctly for me.
I suggest reviewing TurboTax's 1099-R summary in forms mode or in the download of the pdf will all forms and worksheets to confirm which spouse TurboTax thinks received the 1099-R.
Regardless, this message from TurboTax can probably be ignored, either by indicating that none of the distribution was RMD or by indicating that your spouse was not required to take an RMD.
Thank you both @dmertz and @VolvoGirl for your help. I was able to tell TurboTax that no RMD was necessary for my wife. As suggested, I did look at all the forms and the 1099-R's are correctly allocated by TurboTax to me and my wife as appropriate. Moreover, the Personal info has correct birth dates and correctly calculated ages, 73 and 71, for me and my wife respectively. So the evidence is pointing toward the wrong birth date being used for my wife. One last fact that has not come out in the discussion thus far is that the IRA in question was inherited by my wife otherwise she would not have received any 1099-R for 2022 and this issue would never have arisen. Thanks again to all who help get me by this issue.
Inherited? Yes that is important to know. That makes a difference. Hopefully dmertz will come back and post more on that. We should have known to ask that and what code is in box 7.
my wife has an inherited IRA, and she's had to take an RMD every year since she inherited it, well before any of the age requirements kicked in.
My wife would have had the same situation but the IRA was relatively small and there was no practical way to keep it so she had to liquidate it fully. That is reflected on the 1099-R as well. So the IRA no longer exists and all the proceeds are taxable in 2022. That's another reason why the RMD does not make any sense.
If this is an inherited IRA, and is required to take minimum distributions from this IRA, if she completed the RMD then the proper answer would be that this is (probably) all RMD and (probably) satisfies all of the RMD. It's probably that the TurboTax developers has messed up the wording of the message but not the reason for presenting the RMD questions.
@dmertzthanks for the clarification. I agree that my wife would have to take an RMD from her inherited IRA. The 1099-R indicated that she received a full distribution so that would make the RMD issue irrelevant, but certainly she would have been responsible for an RMD if she did not liquidate. The confounding issue for me was that by changing my birth date so that both my wife and I were under 72, the error message went away. This implies that the logic was looking at age as the determinant of the need for an RMD. I think the developers need to look into that issue since that would clearly indicate a bug. You could be right about the developers using an incorrect error message but that should not be influenced by my age, only my wife's age. Thanks again for your help with this.