Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/3/84; site panda.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxb!mhuxn!mhuxm!mhuxj!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!decvax!genrad!panda!dls From: dls@panda.UUCP (Diana L. Syriac) Newsgroups: net.taxes Subject: New Income Averaging form question Message-ID: <280@panda.UUCP> Date: Wed, 6-Feb-85 08:49:41 EST Article-I.D.: panda.280 Posted: Wed Feb 6 08:49:41 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 10-Feb-85 06:39:11 EST Distribution: net Organization: GenRad, Inc., Concord, Mass. Lines: 26 I've just calculated my taxes for this year and I find for the first time in all my years of income taxes (< 10 yrs), that we may actually have to PAY in some additional money to good old IRS. My question concerns directly the new income averaging form. This year, it's using the past three years instead of the past four years, plus, the numbers to multiply/divide the total past years has changed also and is figured differently. Last year (and for at least 3 years before that), it was calculated by multiplying the total past 4 years by .3 (30%). This year, you divide by 3, then multiply by 1.4, which is the equivalent of multiplying the total past 3 years by .47 (47%). If I figure my "total average" using the old way, I eventually get a difference of $12000 of averagable income. Figuring it the new way I eventually get a difference of $24 of averagable income (remember, it has to be greater than $3000 to use the form). Am I doing something wrong, or is the government just trying to make us stop using this form? Have others had this problem as well? I'd appreciate any info on the new Income Averaging forms. thank you. Diana L. Syriac decvax!genrad!panda!dls