nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

new above-the-line charitable contribution deduction

SomebodyInGNV

R64.19 includes the new bonus deduction for over 65 but not the new above-the-line charitable contribution deduction for filers claiming the standard deduction. Can I add a miscellaneous deduction entry of some kind that captures the new charitable deduction?

Find more posts tagged with

Windows

Tax Planner

Comments

Pedro504

My understanding is the charitable contribution deduction you are talking about begins with contributions made in 2026.

SomebodyInGNV

Oops. You're correct. I guess they'll have it in Quicken by then.

Quicken Jasmine

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/comment/20504657#Comment_20504657

Thanks for sharing this information. We appreciate it!

Chris_QPW

If I understand what this is (and I might not) then it seems that the request which will kick in in 2026 would be a tax line change so that it could be connected to a given category/transaction (~~or the workaround would be just to put on an existing tax line~~ I realized this wouldn't work).

If this is correct, the tax lines haven't been updated in decades, so I wouldn't think this would get changed.

And the tax planner would also have to be changed.

SomebodyInGNV

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/comment/20504689#Comment_20504689

One can always hope, when the time comes.

26@harrich

During the Covid Pandemic, there was a charitable deduction available even if using the standard deduction. H&R Block tax software had me put them on Schedule A, just as if I were itemizing everything, applied the limit to whatever I put in there and carried the net across to the 1040. It didn't require a new tax category, just changed the rules on how the category was applied.

Chris_QPW

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/comment/20504887#Comment_20504887

That is basically what I was thinking might be the workaround I posted above, but the reason I crossed it out was as I understand it for Schedule A to be used you have to be itemizing. This deduction can be taken when not itemizing.

And Quicken will need something to separate out such entries. The tax planner and tax reports use tax lines for this (connected to a category). What’s more people would expect this to transfer to their tax program, and that is extra hard because the tax program has to agree on how to handle it.

26@harrich

Last time, I itemized my charitable contributions on schedule A, the tax software applied the limitation to them and carried them across to the 1040 along with the standard deduction. I can't predict what the IRS will do this time, but I don't think anyone else can either. Even if the tax line changes, you can change it in the appropriate category or categories just before you start your tax prep. I'd just ignore the problem until the IRS makes a choice.

Chris_QPW

I'd just ignore the problem until the IRS makes a choice.

It isn't the IRS' choice; it is what the law says.

I haven't personally read the law, and the IRS does have to finalize the documentation/forms, which hasn't happened, so I agree that it is probably best just to wait until it is finalized.

If one believes strongly that they are going to get that deduction, then they can change other values in the Tax Planner to compensate if they like.

SomebodyInGNV

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/comment/20505038#Comment_20505038

The IRS chooses how they implement the law.

Chris_QPW

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/comment/20505110#Comment_20505110

To some degree. If the law says that there has to be a 6,000 deduction on the standard deduction for people over 65, they can't say "Well I don't that is right I think I'm going to give them 2,000 and only if the itemized and they can be of any age."

But yes, I agree that a lot of people don't get that the laws tend to be vague and it is the bureaucrats that actually fill in the details. I haven't read the law and as such I can't really comment on how much it is "pinned down" or such.