CPA TCP: Individual and Personal Tax Planning

CPA means Certified Public Accountant. TCP means Tax Compliance and Planning. Use this focused page when your CPA TCP misses are about individual planning, retirement, investments, estate and gift issues, tax timing, or client objective trade-offs. Drill this topic before returning to mixed practice.

Topic snapshot

What this topic tests

This topic tests individual tax planning in client fact patterns. Strong answers combine compliance, timing, cash flow, retirement, investment, estate, gift, and personal financial planning facts without drifting into generic advice.

Common traps

• choosing a tax-saving move that conflicts with liquidity, timing, risk, or family facts in the stem
• confusing deduction, exclusion, deferral, credit, and basis effects
• missing retirement-plan, investment-income, estate, or gift-tax consequences
• answering as if the question were core REG when the stem asks for a planning recommendation

How to reason through these questions

Identify the taxpayer, goal, time horizon, cash-flow constraint, and tax item. Then decide whether the best answer changes timing, character, deduction, credit, basis, or transfer treatment. The strongest answer should fit both the tax rule and the planning objective.

Sample questions

These questions are original Mastery Exam Prep practice items aligned to this topic area. They are designed for self-assessment and are not official exam questions.

Question 1

Topic: Tax Compliance and Planning for Individuals and Personal Financial Planning

Jordan and Riley, married filing jointly, are reviewing year-end tax planning with their CPA.

The CPA currently recommends using the standard deduction for 2026 and deferring an additional discretionary $5,000 charitable gift until 2027, unless one projection changes materially before year-end. Based on the exhibit, which projected item would most directly change that recommendation?

• A. Qualified dividends
• B. State and local taxes deductible this year
• C. Unreimbursed medical expenses
• D. Tax-exempt municipal bond interest

Best answer: C

What this tests: Tax Compliance and Planning for Individuals and Personal Financial Planning

Explanation: Unreimbursed medical expenses are the key swing item. Fixed itemized deductions are only $1,000 below the standard deduction, and medical expenses become deductible only to the extent they exceed 7.5% of AGI, so a modest increase could flip the recommendation.

Jordan and Riley’s fixed itemized deductions are $29,000: $10,000 of state and local taxes, $12,000 of mortgage interest, and $7,000 of committed charitable contributions. That is below the $30,000 standard deduction, so the CPA’s current advice to defer the extra $5,000 gift makes sense. The projected medical expenses are $16,000, but medical expenses are deductible only to the extent they exceed 7.5% of AGI. Here, 7.5% of $220,000 is $16,500, so none of the projected medical expense is currently deductible. If medical expenses increase above $16,500, the excess becomes an itemized deduction and could push total itemized deductions above the standard deduction, changing the year-end recommendation. The other listed items do not create that same direct change under these facts.

• Unreimbursed medical expenses are the pivot item because they are just below the 7.5%-of-AGI threshold and any excess above that threshold becomes deductible.
• Qualified dividends increase income, but they do not create an itemized deduction that supports accelerating the extra charitable gift.
• Tax-exempt municipal bond interest is generally excluded from federal taxable income and does not help itemizing.
• State and local taxes deductible this year are already at the cap shown, so additional payments would not increase the current federal deduction.

Because current itemized deductions total $29,000 before any medical deduction, medical expenses rising above 7.5% of AGI would become deductible and could make accelerating the extra charitable gift into 2026 worthwhile.

Question 2

Topic: Tax Compliance and Planning for Individuals and Personal Financial Planning

Paula, age 37, is evaluating retirement savings choices. She does not need a current-year income tax deduction, expects to be in a higher tax bracket in retirement, and wants qualified withdrawals to be tax-free. Assuming she is eligible for each option, how should the most suitable vehicle be characterized?

• A. Roth IRA
• B. Traditional IRA
• C. Traditional 401(k)
• D. Nonqualified annuity

Best answer: A

What this tests: Tax Compliance and Planning for Individuals and Personal Financial Planning

Explanation: The best match is a Roth IRA because it trades away a current deduction for tax-free qualified distributions later. That structure is generally attractive when a taxpayer expects a higher tax rate in retirement and can contribute after-tax dollars now.

A Roth IRA is characterized by after-tax contributions, tax-deferred growth, and tax-free qualified distributions. That makes it a strong planning choice for someone who does not need a current deduction and expects future tax rates to be the same or higher. By contrast, a traditional IRA and a traditional 401(k) generally provide current tax deferral or deduction benefits, but distributions are generally taxable in retirement. A nonqualified annuity also uses after-tax dollars and allows tax-deferred buildup, but its earnings are generally taxable when withdrawn, so it does not provide the same tax-free qualified distribution benefit as a Roth IRA. The key classification here is the account type whose primary tax advantage is future tax-free retirement income rather than current-year tax reduction.

• Traditional IRA is tempting because it is an individual retirement account, but its main tax benefit is current deduction potential, and distributions are generally taxable.
• Traditional 401(k) also favors current-year tax deferral, often through payroll deductions, but pretax amounts and earnings are generally taxed when distributed.
• Nonqualified annuity uses after-tax funds, but only basis comes back tax-free; earnings are generally taxable on withdrawal.
• Roth IRA uniquely matches the stated goal of no current deduction in exchange for tax-free qualified withdrawals.

A Roth IRA is funded with after-tax dollars, so it offers no current deduction but allows tax-free qualified distributions.

Question 3

Topic: Tax Compliance and Planning for Individuals and Personal Financial Planning

Taylor’s CPA is evaluating a year-end planning decision. Taylor may exercise employer incentive stock options (ISOs) in December and hold the shares through year-end. The CPA concludes that the exercise could increase Taylor’s current-year federal tax even though it would create no regular taxable income for the year.

Which item would best support the CPA’s conclusion?

• A. A year-end tax projection showing the ISO exercise adds $0 to regular taxable income, adds a $90,000 AMTI adjustment, and makes tentative minimum tax exceed regular tax.
• B. A tax projection assuming Taylor sells all exercised shares immediately in December and recognizes ordinary compensation income.
• C. A brokerage confirmation showing the shares’ exercise-date fair value exceeded the option price by $90,000.
• D. A draft Form W-2 showing no compensation income and no withholding from the ISO exercise.

Best answer: A

What this tests: Tax Compliance and Planning for Individuals and Personal Financial Planning

Explanation: The best support is the side-by-side tax projection showing both systems. It demonstrates that the ISO exercise creates no regular-tax income inclusion but does create an AMTI adjustment large enough for tentative minimum tax to exceed regular tax.

For an ISO exercised and held through year-end, the bargain element generally is not included in regular taxable income in the exercise year. However, that same spread is generally an AMT adjustment that increases alternative minimum taxable income (AMTI). Therefore, the strongest support is evidence that compares both computations and shows the AMTI increase actually matters by causing tentative minimum tax to exceed regular tax. A brokerage statement may show the spread, and a W-2 may show no regular compensation income, but neither one alone proves the federal tax effect when AMT is relevant. A projection based on an immediate sale analyzes a different transaction because a disqualifying disposition changes the regular-tax consequences.

• The brokerage confirmation shows the spread amount, but by itself it does not show the regular-tax result or whether AMT actually increases current-year tax.
• The draft Form W-2 supports the idea that no regular compensation income is reported, but it does not establish the separate AMTI adjustment.
• The immediate-sale projection applies to a disqualifying disposition, which is a different fact pattern from exercising and holding through year-end.

This projection directly shows the deciding point: the ISO exercise produces no regular-tax income inclusion but does increase AMTI enough for tentative minimum tax to drive current-year federal tax.

Question 4

Topic: Tax Compliance and Planning for Individuals and Personal Financial Planning

Riley, a single taxpayer, wants to make one noncash gift this year to a qualifying public charity. Riley’s projected AGI before the gift is $300,000, Riley will itemize deductions regardless of which asset is donated, and any applicable charitable contribution limit will not restrict the current-year deduction. None of the assets is debt-encumbered.

Which donation would minimize Riley’s current-year federal tax liability?

• A. Donate the publicly traded stock held 3 years.
• B. Donate the stock held 8 months.
• C. Donate the artwork that the charity will immediately sell.
• D. Donate the retail inventory from Riley’s sole proprietorship.

Best answer: A

What this tests: Tax Compliance and Planning for Individuals and Personal Financial Planning

Explanation: Donating long-term appreciated publicly traded stock to a public charity generally produces a charitable deduction equal to fair market value. The other listed assets are limited to basis because they are either unrelated-use tangible personal property, ordinary-income property, or short-term capital gain property.

When an individual donates long-term capital gain property to a public charity, the general rule is a deduction at fair market value, assuming the contribution limits do not restrict the current-year deduction. Here, the publicly traded stock held 3 years qualifies for a $30,000 deduction. By contrast, the artwork is tangible personal property that the charity will sell for an unrelated use, so the deduction is limited to basis. The retail inventory is ordinary-income property, so its deduction is also limited to basis. The stock held only 8 months is short-term capital gain property, which likewise produces only a basis deduction. Because Riley will itemize either way and can use the full deduction this year, the long-term appreciated publicly traded stock gives the largest current-year tax reduction.

• The publicly traded stock held 3 years is the best choice because long-term capital gain property donated to a public charity is generally deductible at fair market value.
• The artwork does not produce a fair market value deduction because the charity’s immediate sale is an unrelated use of tangible personal property.
• The retail inventory is ordinary-income property, so the deduction is limited to basis rather than fair market value.
• The stock held 8 months is not long-term capital gain property, so the deduction is limited to basis.

It is the only listed asset that gives Riley a current-year charitable deduction equal to full fair market value.

Question 5

Topic: Tax Compliance and Planning for Individuals and Personal Financial Planning

On December 10, a CPA reviews this client summary:

• Single employee with a year-end bonus to be paid on December 20
• Projected 2026 federal income tax: $52,000
• Federal income tax withheld through November 30: $24,000
• 2026 estimated tax payments made: $0
• 2025 total tax: $31,000
• Assume underpayment exposure is avoided if total withholding and timely estimated payments equal the lesser of 90% of current-year tax or 100% of prior-year tax

A staff note states: “Because the client missed earlier quarterly estimates, the only effective fix is to make a $7,000 fourth-quarter estimated tax payment by January 15, 2027.”

Which response is the best correction to the staff note to address the client’s projected underpayment exposure before year-end?

• A. Have the client increase federal withholding on the December bonus or final paycheck by at least $7,000 before December 31.
• B. Have the client wait until filing the 2026 return and pay any remaining balance with the return or an extension request.
• C. Have the client make a $22,800 estimated tax payment by January 15, 2027, because only 90% of current-year tax can eliminate underpayment exposure.
• D. Have the client make a $7,000 estimated tax payment by January 15, 2027, because estimated payments are treated as paid evenly throughout 2026.

Best answer: A

What this tests: Tax Compliance and Planning for Individuals and Personal Financial Planning

Explanation: The best correction is to increase year-end wage withholding, not rely on a January estimated payment. The client needs only $7,000 more to reach the $31,000 prior-year safe harbor, and withholding is generally treated as if paid ratably during the year.

For late-year estimated tax planning, additional wage withholding is often the best fix because it is generally treated as paid evenly throughout the tax year. Here, the safe-harbor target is the lesser of 90% of current-year tax ($46,800) or 100% of prior-year tax ($31,000), so the client only needs total payments of $31,000. With $24,000 already withheld, another $7,000 is enough. If that amount is withheld from the December bonus or final paycheck before year-end, it can better address exposure created by missed earlier quarters. By contrast, a January 15 estimated payment counts when made, so it may not cure underpayments for earlier quarters. Paying with the return or extension is even later and does not prevent underpayment exposure.

• A $7,000 January estimated payment matches the dollar gap but uses the wrong mechanism; estimated payments are not generally deemed paid evenly throughout the year.
• A $22,800 January estimated payment overstates the needed response by forcing the 90%-of-current-year method even though the prior-year safe harbor is lower.
• Paying with the filed return or an extension may satisfy the balance due, but it does not fix underpayment exposure during the year.

An extra $7,000 of year-end wage withholding reaches the $31,000 prior-year safe harbor, and wage withholding is generally treated as paid evenly throughout the year.

Question 6

Topic: Tax Compliance and Planning for Individuals and Personal Financial Planning

During year-end planning, Melissa asks her CPA about helping her adult daughter buy a home.

• Melissa owns publicly traded stock with a fair market value of $300,000 and a tax basis of $40,000.
• Melissa wants to reduce her taxable estate and avoid paying current capital gains tax herself.
• She is considering either gifting the stock directly now or selling the stock first and gifting the net cash.
• Ignore annual exclusion and lifetime exemption limits.

Which conclusion is most appropriate?

• A. Gifting the stock directly will cause Melissa to recognize the $260,000 built-in gain in the year of the gift.
• B. Neither alternative reduces Melissa’s taxable estate until the daughter later disposes of the stock.
• C. Gifting the stock directly generally best meets Melissa’s stated objectives because she recognizes no gain on the gift and the daughter takes Melissa’s carryover basis.
• D. Selling the stock first generally best meets Melissa’s objectives because a lifetime gift gives the daughter a stepped-up basis equal to fair market value.

Best answer: C

What this tests: Tax Compliance and Planning for Individuals and Personal Financial Planning

Explanation: The direct gift of appreciated stock best fits Melissa’s goals. Melissa does not recognize gain on the gift, and the stock’s value and future appreciation leave her estate immediately, although the daughter receives a carryover basis.

When a donor makes a lifetime gift of appreciated property to an individual, the donor generally does not recognize the built-in gain at the time of the gift. That means Melissa can transfer the stock without paying current capital gains tax herself. The gift also removes the stock’s current value and future appreciation from Melissa’s estate once the transfer is complete. However, the built-in gain is not eliminated; it carries over to the daughter through carryover basis. By contrast, if Melissa sells the stock first, she must recognize the gain immediately and then can gift only the after-tax cash. Because Melissa’s stated objectives are estate reduction and avoiding current capital gains tax herself, gifting the stock directly is the better recommendation.

• Selling first fails Melissa’s tax objective because it accelerates her capital gain; lifetime gifts do not create a fair-market-value basis step-up.
• A direct gift of appreciated property generally does not trigger gain recognition by the donor; gain is usually recognized only on a sale or exchange.
• Estate reduction occurs when Melissa completes the gift, not when the daughter later sells the stock.

A lifetime gift of appreciated property removes the asset from Melissa’s estate without triggering donor-level gain, but the donee keeps the built-in gain through carryover basis.

Question 7

Topic: Tax Compliance and Planning for Individuals and Personal Financial Planning

During a review of Dana Reed’s 2025 individual return, the reviewer notes the following for Dana’s only passive activity:

Additional facts: Dana had no other passive income in 2025, and her modified AGI was $220,000, so no rental real estate special allowance was available.

Which evidence would best support the reviewer’s conclusion that the $21,000 suspended passive loss was incorrectly released in 2025?

• A. The depreciation schedule showing the rental’s adjusted basis and accumulated depreciation on the sale date.
• B. The rent roll showing the property stopped producing rental income after 11/15/2025.
• C. The mortgage payoff letter showing the rental loan was paid in full at closing.
• D. The closing statement showing the buyer of the rental was Dana’s brother.

Best answer: D

What this tests: Tax Compliance and Planning for Individuals and Personal Financial Planning

Explanation: Suspended passive losses are released only if the taxpayer disposes of the entire interest in the activity in a fully taxable transaction to an unrelated person. Evidence that Dana sold the rental to her brother directly shows the release rule was not met, so the suspended loss should not have been freed.

Prior-year passive losses generally stay suspended until the taxpayer has passive income or makes a qualifying disposition of the entire activity. For a full release, the disposition must be fully taxable and to an unrelated person. Here, Dana had no other passive income and no rental real estate special allowance, so the deducted suspended loss could be proper only if the sale satisfied that release rule. A closing statement showing the buyer was Dana’s brother is decisive evidence that the transaction was with a related party. In that case, the prior-year suspended passive loss is not released merely because the property was sold. Debt payoff, asset basis, and post-sale rental activity may matter for other tax computations, but they do not establish whether the passive loss release requirement was met.

• The closing statement naming Dana’s brother as buyer directly supports a related-party disposition, which prevents full release of suspended passive losses.
• The mortgage payoff letter only shows the debt was satisfied; it does not determine whether the buyer was unrelated.
• The depreciation schedule helps compute basis and gain or loss, but it does not answer the passive-loss release question.
• The rent roll may show the activity ended, but ending an activity alone does not free suspended losses.

A sale to a brother is a related-party disposition, so it does not fully release suspended passive losses.

Question 8

Topic: Tax Compliance and Planning for Individuals and Personal Financial Planning

Angela, a calendar-year taxpayer, wants to minimize any federal estimated-tax underpayment penalty before year end. Use these assumptions: if prior-year AGI exceeds $150,000, the safe-harbor required annual payment is 110% of prior-year total tax, and wage withholding is treated as paid evenly throughout the year.

Which year-end action is the best supported by the exhibit?

• A. Submit a revised Form W-4 to have at least $9,900 of additional withholding so total prepayments equal 90% of projected current-year tax.
• B. Make an $8,000 fourth-quarter estimated tax payment by January 15 instead of changing withholding.
• C. Submit a revised Form W-4 to have at least $8,000 of additional federal income tax withheld from the December bonus.
• D. Wait and pay the remaining balance with the return because the projected current-year tax exceeds prior-year total tax.

Best answer: C

What this tests: Tax Compliance and Planning for Individuals and Personal Financial Planning

Explanation: Angela’s required annual payment is the lesser of 90% of current-year tax or 110% of prior-year tax. Here, that is $44,000, so she needs $8,000 more than the $36,000 already prepaid, and extra wage withholding is the strongest fix because it is treated as paid evenly during the year.

Because Angela’s prior-year AGI exceeded $150,000, the prior-year safe harbor is 110% of prior-year total tax: $40,000 × 110% = $44,000. Her other safe-harbor benchmark is 90% of projected current-year tax: $51,000 × 90% = $45,900. The required annual payment is the lesser amount, so $44,000 controls. Angela has prepaid $36,000 so far ($24,000 withholding + $12,000 estimates), leaving an $8,000 shortfall to reach the safe harbor. The best planning move before year end is to increase withholding by $8,000 on the December bonus. Unlike a late estimated payment, withholding is generally treated as paid ratably throughout the year, so it can better reduce or eliminate earlier-quarter underpayment exposure.

• An $8,000 January estimated payment would reach the annual safe-harbor total, but it does not get the same ratable-throughout-the-year treatment as wage withholding.
• Increasing withholding by $9,900 targets 90% of projected current-year tax, but the safe harbor here is lower at $44,000, so that amount is more than needed to address the exposure.
• Paying the balance with the return may settle the tax due, but it does not prevent estimated-tax underpayment penalties for the year.

An extra $8,000 of withholding brings Angela to the $44,000 safe harbor, and year-end withholding is treated as paid evenly throughout the year.

Question 9

Topic: Tax Compliance and Planning for Individuals and Personal Financial Planning

Emma, age 13, is claimed as a dependent by her parents. In 2026, Emma has $7,000 of taxable interest income and no earned income. She has no deductions other than the dependent standard deduction.

Use these assumptions for this question:

• Dependent standard deduction: $1,300
• Next $1,300 of unearned income is taxed at the child’s 10% rate
• Net unearned income above $2,600 is taxed at the parents’ 24% rate

Which tax treatment correctly characterizes Emma’s federal tax on this income?

• A. After the $1,300 standard deduction, all $5,700 of taxable income is taxed at Emma’s 10% rate, for total tax of $570.
• B. After the $1,300 standard deduction, $1,300 is taxed at Emma’s 10% rate and $4,400 is taxed at her parents’ 24% rate, for total tax of $1,186.
• C. After the $1,300 standard deduction, all $5,700 of taxable income is taxed at her parents’ 24% rate, for total tax of $1,368.
• D. After the $1,300 standard deduction, $2,600 is taxed at Emma’s 10% rate and only $3,100 is taxed at her parents’ 24% rate, for total tax of $1,004.

Best answer: B

What this tests: Tax Compliance and Planning for Individuals and Personal Financial Planning

Explanation: Because Emma is age 13 and has only unearned income, the kiddie tax applies. The first $1,300 is offset by the dependent standard deduction, the next $1,300 is taxed at Emma’s 10% rate, and the remaining $4,400 is taxed at her parents’ 24% rate, for total tax of $1,186.

For this fact pattern, first compute Emma’s taxable income: $7,000 of unearned income less the $1,300 dependent standard deduction = $5,700 taxable income. Next compute net unearned income subject to the parents’ rate: $7,000 - $2,600 = $4,400. That $4,400 is taxed at 24%, which gives $1,056. The balance of taxable income, $5,700 - $4,400 = $1,300, is taxed at Emma’s 10% rate, which gives $130. Total tax is $1,186. The key characterization is that not all taxable income is taxed at one rate: part is sheltered, part is taxed at the child’s rate, and only net unearned income above the stated threshold is taxed at the parents’ rate.

• Treating all $5,700 of taxable income as taxed at Emma’s rate ignores the kiddie tax once net unearned income exceeds the stated threshold.
• Treating $2,600 as the amount taxed at Emma’s rate confuses the $1,300 standard deduction with the separate $1,300 child-rate layer.
• Taxing all $5,700 at the parents’ rate overstates the kiddie tax because only net unearned income above $2,600 shifts to the parents’ rate.

Net unearned income is $4,400 ($7,000 - $2,600), so that amount is taxed at the parents’ rate, while the remaining $1,300 of taxable income is taxed at Emma’s rate after the $1,300 standard deduction.

Question 10

Topic: Tax Compliance and Planning for Individuals and Personal Financial Planning

Assume the annual gift tax exclusion is $19,000 per donee for the year, and Dana has ample remaining unified credit. During the year, Dana made these transfers:

• $19,000 cash to her adult son
• $60,000 paid directly to a university for her granddaughter’s tuition
• $95,000 contributed to a 529 plan for that granddaughter

A staff memo states: “All three transfers are covered by exclusions, so Dana has no gift tax filing requirement. From a transfer-tax planning standpoint, paying tuition directly to the university is no better than giving the granddaughter cash to pay tuition herself.”

Which response is the best correction to the memo?

• A. Dana must file Form 709 to elect 5-year averaging for the $95,000 529 contribution, and paying tuition directly to the university is more transfer-tax efficient than giving cash to the granddaughter for tuition.
• B. No correction is needed because all education-related transfers are excluded from gift tax whether paid to the school, to a 529 plan, or directly to the student.
• C. The direct tuition payment is a taxable gift, but the $95,000 529 contribution is fully excluded without any filing requirement because it is a present-interest gift.
• D. The only correction is that the $19,000 cash gift to Dana’s son requires Form 709 because the annual exclusion does not apply to cash gifts.

Best answer: A

What this tests: Tax Compliance and Planning for Individuals and Personal Financial Planning

Explanation: The memo confuses gift tax exclusion rules with filing requirements and planning consequences. Direct tuition paid to the university is excluded, but the $95,000 529 contribution requires Form 709 to elect 5-year averaging, and a cash gift to the student would not receive the same tuition exclusion.

For gift tax purposes, a donor’s direct payment of qualified tuition to an educational institution is excluded from gift tax and does not use the annual exclusion or unified credit. By contrast, giving cash to the student to pay tuition is just a gift to the donee, so it does not receive the tuition-payment exclusion. A contribution to a 529 plan is generally treated as a completed gift to the beneficiary and can qualify for annual exclusion treatment, but when the donor front-loads 5 years of annual exclusions, the donor must file Form 709 to make that election. Here, the $19,000 cash gift to the son is within the stated annual exclusion, the direct tuition payment is separately excluded, and the $95,000 529 contribution requires a return to elect 5-year spread treatment even though Dana may owe no current gift tax because she has remaining unified credit.

• Treating all education-related transfers the same is incorrect; cash given to the student does not qualify for the direct tuition exclusion.
• Saying the son’s $19,000 cash gift requires Form 709 misstates the annual exclusion rule; cash gifts can qualify for the annual exclusion.
• Calling the direct tuition payment taxable reverses the rule; the filing issue arises from the front-loaded 529 election, not from the school payment.

Direct tuition payments are excluded from gift tax, but a front-loaded 529 contribution requires Form 709 to make the 5-year election, and cash to the student would not qualify for the tuition exclusion.

Continue with full practice

Use the CPA TCP Practice Test page for the full practice route, mixed-topic practice, timed mock exams, and explanations.

Related focused pages

• Free CPA TCP Full-Length Practice Exam
• CPA TCP: Entity Tax Compliance
• CPA TCP: Entity Tax Planning
• CPA TCP: Property Transactions

Free review resource

Read the CPA TCP guide on CPAExamsMastery.com, then return to Mastery Exam Prep for timed practice.