Determine if You Should File an Amended Tax Return After Receiving a Corrected Form 1095-A

If you enrolled in qualifying Marketplace health coverage, you have probably filed a tax return based on a Form 1095-A that you received from the Marketplace. Your Marketplace may have subsequently told you that your original Form 1095-A contained an error, and sent a corrected Form 1095-A,

You do not need to file an amended return based on your corrected Form 1095-A. This is true even if additional taxes would be owed based on the new information. Nonetheless, you may choose to file an amended return. Comparing the forms can help you determine whether you are likely to benefit from filing an amended tax return.

Specifically, you are likely to receive a larger refund or owe a smaller tax payment using the corrected Form 1095-A if the two Forms 1095-A generally show the same information but any one of the five scenarios below is true on the corrected form.

  1. Second Lowest Cost Silver Plan Premium is Larger: The monthly premium amounts of the second lowest cost silver plan, shown in Part III, column B, lines 21-32, are greater on the corrected form than on the original form.
  2. Monthly Premium Amounts are Larger: The monthly premium amounts of the plan in which you enrolled, shown in Part III, column A, lines 21-32, are greater on the corrected form than on the original form.
  3. Advance Payment of the Premium Tax Credit Amounts are Lower: The monthly amounts of advance payment of the premium tax credit shown in Part III, column C, lines 21-32 are smaller on the corrected form than on the original form.
  4. More Months of Coverage: Your corrected Form 1095-A lists more months of coverage and your situation meets all the following conditions:
    • The corrected form shows more months of coverage than the original form. This means that the corrected form shows positive values in more of the rows under Part III than the original form.
    • The values are the same on the corrected form for the months that the original form showed coverage.
    • On your original tax return, you claimed a net premium tax credit, meaning you entered a value on line 26 of the Form 8962 you filed.
  5. Fewer Months of Coverage: Your corrected From 1095-A lists fewer months of coverage and your situation meets all the following conditions:
    • The corrected form shows fewer months of coverage than the original form. This means that the corrected form shows positive values in fewer of the rows under Part III than the original form.
    • The values are the same on the original form for the months that the corrected form shows coverage.
    • On your original tax return, you reported owing a repayment of excess APTC, meaning you entered a value on line 29 of the Form 8962 you filed.

If there were multiple differences between your original and the corrected forms or you are not sure if you would benefit from amending, you may want to consult with a tax preparer:

For more information, see our Questions and Answers – Incorrect Forms 1095-A and the Premium Tax Credit.

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Related Articles

March 1, 2020
By William Houston Brown, Adviser, Academy for Consumer Bankruptcy Education, Inc. and Lawrence R. Ahern, III, Brown and Ahern (Nashville, TN) In two February opinions, the Supreme Court addressed issues that appear in bankruptcy cases, one dealing with a common practice of entering nunc pro tunc orders and the other affecting determination of property rights under state law. In a...
Members
July 11, 2021
By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee (Nashville, TN) A prior servicer of a mortgage claim subsequently transferred to another servicer could be held liable if the transferor servicer provided inadequate or incorrect information to the transferee. (Aron) In re Bivens vs. NewRez LLC (In re Bivens), 625 B.R. 843 (Bankr. M.D. N.C., March 25, 2021) Case Summary...
Members
siomos
March 31, 2024
While some circuits differ, statutory interpretation suggests similar treatment for secured and unsecured claims regarding interest disallowance, unless context dictates otherwise. Attorney Siomos brings subscribers a follow-up to last week’s article.
Members
May 5, 2019
The CFPB (Bureau), May 2, 2019, issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), which proposes to raise the coverage thresholds for collecting and reporting data about closed-end mortgage loans and open-end lines of credit under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) rules. The NPRM would provide relief to smaller lenders from HMDA’s data reporting requirements, and would clarify partial exemptions...
JamesDavis
February 25, 2024
“Over the years courts have struggled to apply the lien-avoidance provisions under § 522(f) to jointly owned property. . . .Things get even more confusing when the debtor owns property as a tenancy by the entireties. That antiquated form of ownership has odd characteristics that do not fit well into the § 522(f) calculation.”
Members
September 15, 2019
By Jan Hamilton, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee (Topeka, KS) “I do not suggest my thoughts here are anywhere close to exhaustive. . . . Of course, my thoughts may be off mark on one or more items, but the discussions need to start somewhere, so here we go…” See also: 2019 Legislation Affecting Bankruptcy Practice – Overview
Members
June 30, 2019
By Phil Lamos, Chief Legal Counsel, Office of the Chapter 13 Trustee Lauren A. Helbling (Cleveland, OH) Section 1322(b)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code states that a Chapter 13 plan may not modify a claim that is “secured only by a security interest in real property that is the debtor’s principal residence.” But the inverse of this statute is true; if...
Members
judgebaxter
August 20, 2023
Passing of Retired Ohio Judge Judge Baxter was appointed United States Bankruptcy Judge for the Northern District of Ohio on December 16, 1985, and served in the Court’s Cleveland, Ohio location until his retirement in 2011. He served as Chief Judge between 2004 and 2008. Click here for obituary.
September 20, 2020
By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee for the Middle District of Tennessee (Nashville) A Non-Governmental Private Student Loan Obligation is not always excepted from discharge by § 523(a)(8). (Holmes) McDaniel v. Navient Solutions, LLC, 2020 WL 5104560 (August 31, 2020) Case Summary Bryon and Laura McDaniel filed a Chapter 13 petition in 2009. They acknowledged that, among...
Members
September 12, 2021
By Michael J. McCormick, Esq., McCalla Raymer Leibert Pierce, LLC (Roswell, GA) Escrow 101 – Part 1 Escrow 101 – Part 3 Escrow 102 – Part 1 Escrow 102 – Part 2
Members

Looking to Become a Member?

ConsiderChapter13.org offers a forum to advance continuing education of consumer bankruptcy via access to insightful articles, informative webinars, and the latest industry news. Join now to benefit from expert resources and stay informed.

Webinars

These informative sessions are led by industry experts and cover a range of consumer bankruptcy topics.

Member Articles

Written by industry experts, these articles provide in-depth analysis and practical guidance on consumer bankruptcy topics.

Industry News

The Academy is the go-to source for the latest news and analysis in the Chapter 13 bankruptcy industry.

To get started, please let us know which of these best fits your current position: