Is it ok that the Apportionment Summary says 0% for one state even though I entered numbers and owe tax for that state? How do I fix this if it's a problem?

[IRonMaN]

How did you get it to owe tax if you have zero apportioned?

[ErinElevated]

I put the amount of income per state in the correct boxes, and it created the state forms correctly. However on the Multi-State Apportionment Summary it shows CA as 0% -- but that is the state that the client owes. I'm just wondering if the number(s) isn't carrying over to that summary page correctly, or if there is a bigger issue I should be looking for. How important is it to have the Multi-State Apportionment Summary be correct? Is anybody other than my client even looking at that?

[sjrcpa · Accepted solution]

The Summary doesn't need to be correct but the tax return does. Is the CA apportionment schedule (R?) correct?

CA has a minimum tax, too.

[IRonMaN]

"Is anybody other than my client even looking at that?"

The states certainly are going to be looking at that.  How are you calculating what they owe the state?  Normally that calculation is based on the apportionment factors.

[ErinElevated]

It took a call to support, but it was a problem with the numbers from some boxes not affecting the summary. Now that the number is entered in a different box, everything matches up!

[kj1]

Can you provide more detail as to the solution here? I have the very same issue.