Form 8891 questions here please!!!!
Moderator: Mark T Serbinski CA CPA
If you have been reporting every year with <i>any</i> statement, then use 2002 as the first year your statement was for RP 02-23, since everything on the information on the old 89-45 statement covers all that is required.
That line is specifically for those who only used 89-45 sporadically (it was not a one-time irrevocable election).
For instance , you could have elected 89-45 in 1998 and never snce (there is such one on this board).
The election made this year would be the first such one.
If you wanted to retro-actively file for 02-23 (orillia should not), then one wold file all the req'd 1040-X's and statements, and then indicate whichever was the first year one there 8891 for this year.
<i>nelsona non grata... and non pro</i>
That line is specifically for those who only used 89-45 sporadically (it was not a one-time irrevocable election).
For instance , you could have elected 89-45 in 1998 and never snce (there is such one on this board).
The election made this year would be the first such one.
If you wanted to retro-actively file for 02-23 (orillia should not), then one wold file all the req'd 1040-X's and statements, and then indicate whichever was the first year one there 8891 for this year.
<i>nelsona non grata... and non pro</i>
You would only send a 1040-X now if you have already submitted your return (paper or e-file) and had received your refund.
Otherwise, simply e-file now, and submit the 1040-X after you get your refund. You still have plenty of toime. The 8891 can be submitted any time before <b>AUGUST</b> 15, 2005, since no return is really considered late until that date.
You submit a 1040-X to the same address as you would your paper return (ie. the Center overseeing your state)
<i>nelsona non grata... and non pro</i>
Otherwise, simply e-file now, and submit the 1040-X after you get your refund. You still have plenty of toime. The 8891 can be submitted any time before <b>AUGUST</b> 15, 2005, since no return is really considered late until that date.
You submit a 1040-X to the same address as you would your paper return (ie. the Center overseeing your state)
<i>nelsona non grata... and non pro</i>
<b>What bank statements?!</b>
There is absolutely no requirement to submit any bank or mutual fund statements along with the Form.
Send the form(s) -- that's it!
As to the extra stuff on the 1040-X, yeah, if you are doing it by hand, no need to fill in those lines, but the 1040-X that your software spits out has it, so I leave it.
<i>nelsona non grata... and non pro</i>
There is absolutely no requirement to submit any bank or mutual fund statements along with the Form.
Send the form(s) -- that's it!
As to the extra stuff on the 1040-X, yeah, if you are doing it by hand, no need to fill in those lines, but the 1040-X that your software spits out has it, so I leave it.
<i>nelsona non grata... and non pro</i>
-
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 9:03 am
Form 8891 has been released by the IRS. It is basically unchanged from the draft in August 2004. However, there is an error regarding the definitions of Beneficiary and Annuitant. The IRS has made a distinction between the two...however, under the Canada Income Tax Act, they are one and the same. More information is available at the Watson Wyatt website...in the InfoFlash Canada section.
IRS has long had a kooky definition for the two, especially with respect to what Cdns usually view as annuitant and beneficiary.
The advice has always been to view the one who is inline to get the money as the beneficiary, and to never claim to be an annuitant, since it doesn't make sense in the RRSP/RRIF world.
Rev proc 2002-23 made the same incomprehensible 'distinction' between the two.
The important thing is for <u>all</u> to file 8891 as <b>beneficiaries</b> so as to correctly make the election, report the year-end value, and, where applicable report any contributions or income from each RRSP.
<i>nelsona non grata... and non pro</i>
The advice has always been to view the one who is inline to get the money as the beneficiary, and to never claim to be an annuitant, since it doesn't make sense in the RRSP/RRIF world.
Rev proc 2002-23 made the same incomprehensible 'distinction' between the two.
The important thing is for <u>all</u> to file 8891 as <b>beneficiaries</b> so as to correctly make the election, report the year-end value, and, where applicable report any contributions or income from each RRSP.
<i>nelsona non grata... and non pro</i>
Nelson - I moved to the US in 1984 with some RRSPs. I have deferred tax all along, but have only back-filled 02-23 with 1040-Xs to 2000. What year should I put in 6b? 1984? 2000? (I don't think there was any official documentation for deferring back then, it was just the accepted thing that accountants did!)
Nelsona, any idea how to handle transfers in 2004? The 8891 doesn't seem to address this? Should I still use the transferee and transferor outlines from the web page? We had three RRSP's consolidated into a single account during 2004. All three had been previously reported using 02-23...
A question on the outlines as well (if I should use them). What is the criteria/calculation to get to 'Total Income Deferred by Article XVIII(7) on this account:'?
Nathan
A question on the outlines as well (if I should use them). What is the criteria/calculation to get to 'Total Income Deferred by Article XVIII(7) on this account:'?
Nathan
Transfers are no longer tracked by this process, and are no longer required to be reported.
In fact, as the instructions indicate, an election made on a previous account 'attaches' to any and all future transfers.
So if you previously made the election in, say 2002 on Account A, and subsequently transferred some or all of the funds from that account to B, you are viewed as having made the election on the funds in 'B' back in 2002.
You don't use the outlines anymore, but the income deferred comes from your yearly calculations ofthe income generated in your account. This has ALWAYS been something that you should track (for yourself), as you will need this if you ever begin to withdraw funds while taxable in US.
I would suggest that everyone who uses the election, keep track of the yearly ammounts that would go on line 10, every year, as you very likely will need this to determine line 7b at some point.
<i>nelsona non grata... and non pro</i>
In fact, as the instructions indicate, an election made on a previous account 'attaches' to any and all future transfers.
So if you previously made the election in, say 2002 on Account A, and subsequently transferred some or all of the funds from that account to B, you are viewed as having made the election on the funds in 'B' back in 2002.
You don't use the outlines anymore, but the income deferred comes from your yearly calculations ofthe income generated in your account. This has ALWAYS been something that you should track (for yourself), as you will need this if you ever begin to withdraw funds while taxable in US.
I would suggest that everyone who uses the election, keep track of the yearly ammounts that would go on line 10, every year, as you very likely will need this to determine line 7b at some point.
<i>nelsona non grata... and non pro</i>