- Which of the following is correct regarding her 2025 U.S. return?
Answer: She must file a 2025 Form 1040 to claim the exclusion, and the maximum foreign earned income exclusion for 2025 is $130,000.
Choice B is correct. Under IRC § 911, a qualified individual may elect to exclude foreign earned income. For 2025 the maximum foreign earned income exclusion is $130,000; Rosa's exclusion is limited to the $95,000 she actually earned. The election is made by filing Form 2555 with Form 1040, so a return is required to claim it. Choice A is wrong because a U.S. citizen cannot use Form 1040-NR merely because her tax home is abroad. Choice C is wrong because the exclusion is not automatic; the taxpayer must file to elect it. Choice D is wrong because, under Treas. Reg. § 1.6081-5(a)(1), a U.S. citizen whose tax home and abode are outside the United States is automatically allowed until June 15 to file; Form 4868 is not needed for that automatic two-month extension.
- Under the substantial presence test, which of the following is correct for Camille's 2025 U.S. tax treatment?
Answer: She is a nonresident alien for 2025 because her weighted days of presence equal 180, and she had no U.S.-source income, so she is not required to file a U.S. tax return.
IRC § 7701(b)(3)(A) applies the substantial presence test by counting all current-year days, one-third of the first preceding year's days, and one-sixth of the second preceding year's days. Camille's weighted total is 120 + (120 ÷ 3) + (120 ÷ 6) = 180, which is below the 183-day threshold. She is therefore a nonresident alien, and because she had no U.S.-source income and was not engaged in a U.S. trade or business, IRC § 6012 does not require her to file. Choice A incorrectly counts all prior-year days in full. Choice B reaches 200 by applying one-third to both prior years instead of one-sixth to the second preceding year. Choice D incorrectly treats three-year physical presence alone as creating a filing obligation.
- Which of the following is correct regarding Rafael's U.S. tax residency for 2025?
Answer: He is a resident alien for 2025 because his weighted days of presence equal 250, and the closer connection exception is unavailable while his application for adjustment of status is pending.
IRC § 7701(b)(3)(B) provides the closer connection exception, and IRC § 7701(b)(3)(C) makes it unavailable for any year in which an application for adjustment of status is pending. Rafael's weighted days are 150 + (200 ÷ 3) + (200 ÷ 6) = 250, so he meets the substantial presence test under IRC § 7701(b)(3)(A), and the pending Form I-485 bars the closer connection exception. Choice A ignores the pending application. Choice B mistakes a B-2 visitor for an exempt individual; exempt status is defined in IRC § 7701(b)(5), not by whether the visitor works. Choice C requires approval, but the pendency of the application is itself disqualifying.
- Which of the following is correct regarding the 2025 joint return?
Answer: Under the election, both spouses are treated as U.S. residents for the entire year and report their worldwide income on a joint Form 1040.
Choice D is correct. Under IRC § 6013(g), a nonresident alien married to a U.S. citizen or resident may elect, with the consent of both spouses and if the election has not previously been made, to be treated as a U.S. resident for the entire taxable year. Thus the couple files a joint Form 1040 and reports combined worldwide income. Choice A states the result if no election were made. Choice B misstates the return: the election produces one joint Form 1040, not a separate Form 1040-NR for Miguel. Choice C adds a substantial-presence requirement that § 6013(g) does not contain.
- Which of the following is correct regarding her 2025 U.S. tax treatment?
Answer: She is a U.S. resident alien for 2025 and must report the $40,000 of Australian interest on Form 1040.
Choice C is correct. Under IRC § 7701(b)(1)(A)(i), an alien is a U.S. resident for any calendar year in which the alien is a lawful permanent resident at any time during the year. A resident alien is taxed by IRC § 61 on worldwide income. Because she held the green card for all of 2025 and did not relinquish it, she must file Form 1040 and report the Australian interest. Choice A wrongly treats the substantial presence test as the only residency test. Choice B wrongly equates tax residence with physical presence or permanent home; the green card test covers the entire calendar year. Choice D confuses the §911 foreign earned income exclusion, which applies only to earned income, with foreign investment interest.
- Which of the following is correct regarding Naoko's U.S. tax residency for 2025?
Answer: She is a resident alien for 2025 because her two-year exemption for a J-1 research scholar has been exhausted, and her days of presence in 2025 count toward the substantial presence test.
IRC § 7701(b)(5) defines exempt individuals for the substantial presence test, and a J-1 teacher, trainee, or research scholar is exempt for only two calendar years within the six-year lookback period. Naoko used her two exempt years in 2022 and 2023, so she is not an exempt individual in 2025. Her 365 days of presence in 2025 alone satisfy IRC § 7701(b)(3)(A), making Choice A correct. Choice B states a blanket J-1 exemption and misses the two-year limit. Choice C invents an election to waive exempt status. Choice D treats the lack of a green card as dispositive, but the substantial presence test can create residency without a green card.
- Which of the following is correct regarding her U.S. residency and filing obligation for 2025?
Answer: She is a nonresident alien for 2025 because the closer connection exception applies, and she reports the $12,000 on Form 1040-NR.
Under IRC § 7701(b)(3)(B), an alien who otherwise meets the substantial presence test is not treated as a U.S. resident if she was present in the United States for fewer than 183 days during the year, maintained a tax home in a foreign country during the year, had a closer connection to a foreign country than to the United States, did not have a pending LPR application, and timely filed Form 8840. Here the weighted count is 140 + 150/3 + 100/6 = 206.67 days, so the substantial presence test is met, but the closer connection exception overrides it and she is a nonresident alien for 2025. A nonresident alien with income effectively connected with a U.S. trade or business reports that income on Form 1040-NR. Choice A is therefore correct. Choice B ignores the exception. Choice C miscounts the weighted days and overlooks the filing obligation for effectively connected income. Choice D reverses the 183-day condition: the closer connection exception cannot apply to an individual present in the United States for 183 days or more during the year.
- Which of the following is correct regarding Vivian's U.S. residency status for 2025?
Answer: Her weighted days total 220, so she meets the substantial presence test; she will be treated as a nonresident for 2025 if she timely files Form 8840 under the closer connection exception.
Under IRC § 7701(b)(3), the substantial presence test is met for 2025 only if an individual was present in the United States at least 31 days during 2025 and the weighted three-year total is at least 183 days. Vivian's weighted total is 170 + (120/3) + (60/6) = 220 days, so she satisfies the test. Because she was present fewer than 183 days in 2025, had a tax home in Argentina throughout 2025, and has closer connections to Argentina, she will be treated as a nonresident under the closer connection exception of IRC § 7701(b)(3)(B) if she timely files Form 8840. Thus, Choice C is correct. Choice A uses only her 2025 days and treats prior-year days as irrelevant. Choice B omits the 10 weighted days from 2023, reaching 210 instead of 220. Choice D adds the actual days for all three years without applying the required one-third and one-sixth weights.
- Which of the following is correct regarding Ravi's 2025 U.S. tax status?
Answer: He is a resident alien from May 1 through December 31, 2025, and a nonresident alien before that date; as a dual-status taxpayer he must itemize deductions and cannot claim the standard deduction.
IRC § 7701(b)(2)(A) provides that an alien who meets the substantial presence test is a resident from the first day of presence in the calendar year, not from January 1. Ravi was present from May 1 and satisfies the substantial presence test, so he is a resident from May 1 through December 31 and a nonresident before that date, making him a dual-status taxpayer. Under IRC § 63(c) and IRS Pub. 519, a dual-status taxpayer may not take the standard deduction and must itemize; therefore Choice C is correct. Choice A treats the substantial presence test as creating full-year residency from January 1. Choice B correctly identifies the residency period but incorrectly allows the standard deduction. Choice D is wrong because H-1B visa holders can meet the substantial presence test before completing a full calendar year.
- Which of the following is correct regarding her 2025 federal return?
Answer: She files Form 1040 marked "Dual-Status Return," attaches a Form 1040-NR marked "Dual-Status Statement" for the nonresident period, and may not claim the standard deduction.
IRS Pub. 519 (Dual-Status Aliens) and the Form 1040 and Form 1040-NR instructions govern the dual-status return. A dual-status alien who is a resident on the last day of the tax year files Form 1040 marked "Dual-Status Return" and attaches a statement showing the income for the nonresident part of the year; Form 1040-NR may be used as that statement, marked "Dual-Status Statement." A dual-status alien may not claim the standard deduction. She was a resident on December 31, 2025, so Choice B is correct. Choice A states the filing rule for an alien who is a nonresident on the last day of the year, which reverses the return and the statement on these facts. Choice C is wrong because the standard deduction is unavailable to a dual-status alien regardless of residence at year end. Choice D is wrong because income for the nonresident portion is still subject to U.S. tax if it is U.S.-source income or income effectively connected with a U.S. trade or business.
- Which of the following is correct regarding Lucia's 2025 U.S. tax residency if she makes any available election?
Answer: She may elect to be treated as a resident alien for the period November 1 through December 31, 2025, by attaching a statement to a timely filed return.
Treas. Reg. § 301.7701(b)-4(c) permits a first-year choice when the alien does not meet the substantial presence test in the election year, is present for at least 31 consecutive days, is present for at least 75% of the period from the first day of that 31-day period through year-end, and meets the substantial presence test in the following year. Lucia satisfies all of these conditions, so Choice A is correct: if she attaches the required statement to a timely filed return, her residency begins November 1, 2025. Choice B wrongly makes the election apply to the entire year. Choice C treats the first-year choice as automatic, but it is an election. Choice D ignores the election entirely.
- Can Mateo make the first-year choice for 2025 and, if so, from what date is he treated as a U.S. resident?
Answer: Yes; he is treated as a resident from November 1, 2025, but only if he satisfies the substantial presence test for 2026 and makes the election on or with his 2025 return.
Choice C is correct. Under IRC § 7701(b)(4), an alien who was not a U.S. resident in the preceding year and does not meet the substantial presence test in the election year may elect to be treated as a resident for part of that year if three requirements are met: present in the United States for at least 31 consecutive days, present for at least 75% of the days from the first day of that 31-day period through December 31, and meeting the substantial presence test in the following year. Mateo was present continuously from November 1 through December 16, 2025, so his 31-consecutive-day period began November 1. From November 1 through December 31 there are 61 days, and 0.75 × 61 = 45.75, so 46 days of presence during that period is enough. He was present all 46 days. If he satisfies the substantial presence test for 2026, he may make the election with his 2025 return, and residency begins November 1, 2025. Choice A incorrectly applies the 183-day substantial presence test to the election year itself. Choice B uses the last day of the 31-day period; the statute uses the first day. Choice D ignores the partial-year limitation in the first-year choice.
- Which of the following is correct regarding Marcus's 2025 filing requirement?
Answer: Marcus is required to file a return because his unearned income exceeds $1,350, but Form 8615 is not required because his unearned income does not exceed $2,700.
IRC § 6012(a)(1)(C) requires a dependent to file when gross income exceeds the dependent standard deduction under IRC § 63(c)(5). For a dependent with no earned income, that standard deduction is $1,350, so Marcus's $2,200 of unearned income requires him to file. Because his unearned income does not exceed $2,700, Form 8615 is not required; the amount above $1,350 is taxed at the child's rate. Choice A uses the correct filing result but incorrectly requires Form 8615. Choice C treats the Form 8615 threshold as an exemption from filing. Choice D uses the basic single standard deduction instead of the smaller dependent standard deduction.
- Which of the following is correct regarding Leila's 2025 U.S. tax return?
Answer: She must file Form 1040 as a U.S. resident alien for 2025 and report the $95,000 of foreign salary on that return, subject to any applicable foreign earned income exclusion or foreign tax credit.
Choice A is correct. Under IRC § 7701(b)(1)(A), an alien who is a lawful permanent resident at any time during the calendar year is a resident alien for that year. Leila's green card remained in effect because she did not file Form I-407 and USCIS did not revoke it; moving abroad by itself does not end green card status for tax purposes. A resident alien files Form 1040 and reports worldwide income. The Dubai salary is therefore reportable, subject to any foreign earned income exclusion or foreign tax credit she may claim. Choice B applies the Form 1040-NR rule for nonresident aliens, but she is not a nonresident. Choice C assumes the move created a mid-year residency termination; without abandonment or revocation, there is no termination. Choice D ignores the green card test and the worldwide filing obligation of a resident alien.
