So I'm reading up on how to handle quarterly taxes for my s-corp. I am probably doing this fairly late since Q1 payments are due next week, yikes!
My understanding is this. I set my reasonable salary lets say $150,000 because Married filing jointly that should still allow roth IRA contribution and a full cap of $54,000 into solo 401k for 2017.
Business income is expected to be $220,000 unless contract is renewed in which case 2017 income could be higher. Does this matter or do I only estimate for my salary?
I believe I only need to pay estimated taxes on the $150,000. but the form says AGI. If I know that I will cap my HSA at $6750 and cap my solo 401k at $18,000, do I estimate my taxable income at $125,250? Or lower if I know I will have agi reducing expenses?
Two comments...
1. You're very possibly setting your salary too high. Yes, that high salary lets you contribute more to a pension... but at the cost of way higher payroll taxes. You might find this blog did useful: http://evergreensmallbusiness.com/s-corporation-salary-rules/
2. Your AGI includes all your income so not just your W-2 but the amount shown in box 1 of the K-1 you get or will get from the S corporation.
Funny enough, SeattleCPA I always find your posts here really awesome and when I started asking these questions on google your blog was the top result, so I've been poking around your S-Corp advice already.
Using the link you used in 1) I think I was leaning toward the 60 40 idea. The reason being that if this job gets extended and everything that is ongoing continues through December I could end up with Revenue of $264k and I'm not sure I'd be comfortable having a $100,000 or $127,000 Salary on those kind of profits as a single person consultant s-corp. But I'm definitely open to hearing more reasons why that should be fine.
Can you explain number 2 more? My Agi will include distributions from the K-1? Is this reaching a level where employing my wife as a book keeper/secretary for double retirement deductions?
So, first, about a $100K salary, you do need to be reasonable. But something like $100K or the FICA limit often does work. You may need to use tricks though... Like lots of fringe benefits correctly accounted for so as to push up your compensation package without pushing up your SE taxes. But then also keep these two examples in mind: Warren Buffet pays himself $100K a year... and John Edwards the former Democratic VP candidate paid himself $250K in salary and took another $25M in S corporation profits from his personal injury law firm. (Google either man and the issue for more details.)
Second, I think we all need to work from the same definitions... Say a business before paying the shareholder employee any wages makes $200K a year. Assume that the corp pays out $100K of this as wages. And assume the corp pays half of remaining $50K to the shareholder and then retains half.
In this case, wages equal $100K of course. This money is taxed. (Both income taxes and employment taxes)
The K-1 shows $100K as the box 1
distributive share. And this money is taxed too. (But just income taxes)
And then the K-1 also shows $50K as the
distribution... and that number at least for this discussion has no income tax effect.
What the IRS can do, if they think the $100K figure is too low for wages is reclassify some or all of the $50K distribution as wages.
I mention all this because some of the confusion in this thread seems to stem from discussion participants working from different definitions of the term "distribution."