Jump to content
ATX Community

DUE DILIGENCE


TAXMAN

Recommended Posts

Best thing I've found is a report card from whatever school they're going to.  Many schools will list the kid's full pedigree: name, address, age, DOB, grade they're in (and grades), phone number, school year enrolled for,  parents' name, address, and related information.  So anyway, if you've got that then you're ready to roll.  Unfortunately, some schools don't list the home address (although T/P may :D have kept the envelope it was mailed in). Other stuff of course (next best) is medical records, then day care bills (sometimes pretty sketchy), social security and/or insurance cards (I know, I know - those two generally don't have anything except the name but it's something).   

Next year -- DNA

 

 

     

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, cbslee said:

All of this socalled documentation does nothing more than provide circumstantial evidence.

None of it actually provides direct proof ! 

Circumstantial evidence, especially when corroborated, is much stronger than direct evidence, such as an eyewitness.   Forensics and fingerprints are circumstantial evidence.  

BTW, there has never been a scientific study made to prove that a set of fingerprints is unique to only one individual.

https://www.cmu.edu/dietrich/news/news-stories/2017/october/aaas-fingerprint-report.html

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As one who has cameras around and recording 24/7, how about video/audio in your office?  No more "they said, I said" issues.

I have come to accept I am nearly always being recorded, if not by me, by the street cameras, the light pole cameras, and all the business, home, and dash cameras.  The new "good fences make good neighbors" is "good video and audio makes good neighbors".

Caveat: In some states, such as mine, attempting to using audio as evidence is a crime.  There are exceptions, one of which covers my audio recordings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A camera can be in a ceiling/wall/wall corner.  Covers the whole room.  A sign on the door announcing the surveillance for safety (or whatever is required in your state).  At the least, it will likely create a more civilized environment.  At best, it can protect you and yours from (or help you deal with) something untoward.

If this were not a public forum, I could share more, which would explain why I use all available protections and deterrents, even in settings which most people would not worry.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, cbslee said:

All of this socalled documentation does nothing more than provide circumstantial evidence.

None of it actually provides direct proof ! 

Hmmm; never thought of it that way before.  Before Max came up with his defense (below) of my position, I was gonna suggest if the auditor was willin' to put in the time, that he  subpoena all the kid's teachers to swear and declare he/she existed in physical reality and was present all the days they could remember.  Don't know if they'd have to have followed 'em home a few times or not.

9 hours ago, Max W said:

Circumstantial evidence, especially when corroborated, is much stronger than direct evidence, such as an eyewitness.   Forensics and fingerprints are circumstantial evidence..."  

 

You're a gentleman and a scholar, Max! :D

 

______________________________________

Children should be SEEN :mellow: and not heard. -- IRS

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got so annoyed on Facebook at a tax pro who thought a SS card and  birth certificate proved something worthwhile. Uh. Yeah. A child was born back there somewhere and was issued a SSN. The end. I started to point that out but she got four likes before I could type it so I just banged my head on my desk and came back here. 

  • Like 6
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, BLACK BART said:

Hmmm; never thought of it that way before.  Before Max came up with his defense (below) of my position, I was gonna suggest if the auditor was willin' to put in the time, that he  subpoena all the kid's teachers to swear and declare he/she existed in physical reality and was present all the days they could remember.  Don't know if they'd have to have followed 'em home a few times or not.

You're a gentleman and a scholar, Max! :D

 

______________________________________

Children should be SEEN :mellow: and not heard. -- IRS

Thank you Black Bart, I'm not so sure about either one.  

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's not get carried away here.  Form 886-H-EIC is sent by the IRS when they question a taxpayer's EIC eligibility.  On the other hand, Form 8867 gives a list of acceptable documents but states that none of them is "specifically required."  A birth certificate shows the child's parents, child care statements show names and addresses--good enough for 8867 but not the 886 under audit.  In fact 8867 has a line where you mark if you asked the taxpayer if s/he could provide the underlying documentation.  It doesn't demand that the preparer see it.  I do very few EIC returns, and we know our clients, so I don't anticipate that someone else will claim their children.  If you have a lot of walk-ins, that might not be the case and you may want to do more to CYA.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Yardley CPA said:

"Has anyone received any type of IRS inquiry (Form 886-H-EIC or something else) asking them to substantiate a clients EIC filing?"

Well, yes actually; many years ago-a single, HOH guy claiming two kids (don't know where mom was).  A correspondence audit and IRS figured the chances of a male raising kids was much lower than vice-versa.   He dug up proof of residence, but I still think something was rotten in Denmark, Arkansas.  He just had that look; you know, the one where he seems to be thinking "How can I work an angle on this guy?"  Anyway, we got him the EIC, but he was mad at me about being checked and left, which suited both of us. 

"I only have a handful of EIC clients and have they're returns have never been questioned.  How often does the IRS seek clarification/proof for EIC?"

Practically never, according to a former poster who long-ago was practically drummed out of another board for catering mainly to the EIC crowd around Washington, DC.  Nice guy though; knew his stuff and had some very useful info - he was knee-deep in advance loans when IRS audited him.   I think he said the agents told him if you did less than 150 or so EICs returns, then they weren't interested in you (apparently only concerned with economics of scale).  So anyway, you're safe, I think.

He may still be around; I was thinking I'd seen his board name here once but can't remember what it was.  Come back, if you're still around - I'll offer a glass of water and a kind word. :) Too, maybe you can offer the babes-in-the-woods some reassurance.  The crowd here's a little looser - no crucifixions allowed.

Yardley, one-upping your proverb:  "TO EVERY DOG, HIS MASTER IS NAPOLEON - HENCE, THE POPULARITY OF DOGS!" --- Anonymous

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Years ago the IRS declared war on males heads of household.  I worked at a chain back then, and the number of audits was overwhelming.  Now that a number of states offer EITC, they are the ones doing the audits.  CT audits every single one the first time EITC is claimed.  Never could get a straight answer from them about whether they share their results with IRS, but I suspect they do.  IRS is happy for the states to do their work for them.

  • Angry 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎1‎/‎22‎/‎2018 at 8:06 AM, Yardley CPA said:

Has anyone received any type of IRS inquiry (Form 886-H-EIC or something else) asking them to substantiate a clients EIC filing?  I only have a handful of EIC clients and have they're returns have never been questioned.  How often does the IRS seek clarification/proof for EIC?

There was a pro on FB (yeah, I know) that had an visit from IRS, and she didn't have the necessary documentation for the returns IRS chose to check at her office and got nailed pretty good, over $20,000 in penalties, if I recall.  Of course, she was diligent, just in her mind, not on paper.  /s

IRS says they pick preparers and audit at least 25 returns based upon them preparing [a relatively large number] of returns with a "high chance of error." 

https://www.eitc.irs.gov/tax-preparer-toolkit/compliance/auditing/auditing-for-due-diligence-compliance

(Regarding "high chance of error," most DIY returns I've seen fit that bill.)

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...