Trucker per-diem for meals?

[jainen]

I don't even try

>>I don't seem to be able to agree with myself either<<

I don't even try to agree with myself, and have sometimes berated other posters who wanted to hold me to a particular viewpoint just because I argued for it. One slow Sunday I spent all morning arguing both sides of an issue, but only Black Bart noticed.

I can't imagine making a h-w team file a 1065. I certainly wouldn't do it myself. (Okay, I live in a community property state where there is supposed to be some special deal, but honestly I've never even bothered to look up what that deal actually involves because I'm just not going to do it the other way regardless.)

Kind of a problem about SE tax. Unlike the popular trend, I believe SS credit is absolutely essential for everyone. Lucky for me I've never had a married couple who depended solely on Schedule C for those credits.

[MAMalody]

Where did the OP say it was a husband/wife team?

Personally, I would probaby to two Schedule Cs.

[Zee]

Where did the OP say it was a husband/wife team?

Personally, I would probaby to two Schedule Cs.

4th post in string. After reading all these posts, and the early string Brad provided in his link I've changed my mind. I'd file one Schedule C and two Schedule SE's (assuming the result would be the same as a partnership return). However, a 1065 really wouldn't be much more difficult, would it?

[Brad Imsdahl]

After reading all these posts, and the early string Brad provided in his link I've changed my mind.

Paul, take note. One more person has jumped over to my side.

Doesn't that make me ahead 20 to 1 by now?

[ChEAr$]

You hit the nail on the head

So...what's the answer. Should this husband & wife "team" file two Schedule C's, or a partnership return?

For my spousal truckers, it's a 1065.

Cause if it were only a schedule C, the only deduction would be for the person whose
name is atop it.

[ChEAr$]

Not disputing anything about penalties

A husband and wife business never has to file as a partnership when there are no special allocations, all income and expenses are properly and timely reported on the 1040, none of the separately stated deductions from the Schedule K-1 are abused (such as Sec 179 limits), and self employment tax is properly split on two separate Schedule SE’s. There are those, including my co-author, who will jump down my throat for saying this, but nobody will be able to provide a citation of any penalty that can be imposed for taking this position.

Rather just talking about common sense. Two spice (spouses) drive a truck, therefore
they operate as a partnership, thus a 1065 should be filed. Just common sense.

Or do the regulations militate against common sense?

Ooops, sorry I asked. (grin)

[ChEAr$]

Filing ONE schedule c

4th post in string. After reading all these posts, and the early string Brad provided in his link I've changed my mind. I'd file one Schedule C and two Schedule SE's (assuming the result would be the same as a partnership return). However, a 1065 really wouldn't be much more difficult, would it?

just might work in one of those communistic states like California, Arizona, et al.

[Brad Imsdahl]

Rather just talking about common sense. Two spice (spouses) drive a truck, therefore
they operate as a partnership, thus a 1065 should be filed. Just common sense.

Two spice operate a truck. They file one Schedule C and split the profits on Schedule SE. The tax result on the joint 1040 is identical to what it would have been had a 1065 with two K-1s been filed.

There is no penalty for not filing the 1065 in such a situation. Is it common sense to jump through all those extra hoops to get to the same result when there is no requirement to do so? Or do we have an ulterior motive in charging all those extra fees for all those extra tax returns that need to be filed?