Leaderboard

Well I guess you make the rules now regarding the time lines of posting as well. Notice, I didn't try to answer the question I just commented on your posts. As I said, read read read

I'm going to beta-test 2013, so I'll have an idea of how next years program is working. If its working, I'll happily stay with ATX. Remember, I'm not having big issues with 2012; the main one is the memory leaks.

1. Tax season has ended, and the software issues are no longer so numerous that they need their own forum. I'm going to remove the Software Issues forum, and bring the threads back into General Chat now that things have calmed down. 2. If you people can't keep your political zealotry to your own threads, I'm going to make some changes to the forums. I'll create a new Politics forum, where anyone who wants to can go bananas. We'll keep it out of General Chat entirely if on-topic threads continue to get derailed. It shouldn't be necessary, but discussing things like politics and religion make people lose their minds. It's usually hilarious to watch, but not when you're trying to keep a friendly atmosphere on an internet forum. Then it's just obnoxious. I'll also write a script that filters every post in General Chat for political terms, and hold those threads in a moderation queue where I'll either publish if it's not a political rant, or delete it before it can go public. If that doesn't work, I'll start with the warnings and removing post rights for periods of time. I don't care if people want to discuss politics, but you guys are destroying on-topic threads with your lunacy and risk alienating politically moderate members, which is likely most of them. Cut it out.

Thanks Eric. None of what's posted from either perspective bothers me - I like the give-and-take even when it gets a little out of hand. It's easy enough to skip over when it gets silly. But if it disturbs others then I'm fine with your guidelines and will certainly abide by them. We need to keep as many as possible engaged to suit our professional purposes. I appreciate your dedication to this forum.

Sorry, but I just have to vent! I'm gravely concerned about the competency of IRS's employees. It's bad enough that I recently had to teach a supervisor and an auditor the difference in accountable and non-accountable plans and when employee business expense deductions are allowed recently for a correspondence audit, however, the letter one of my clients got today totally blows my mind! From what I can tell, while IRS did the matching of 1099's to returns, my clients did in fact not tell me that they have had a very small amount of dividends each year since they were married. Finally in 2011, the $19 in dividends did make a $3 difference on their Federal return. It appears that when the computer spits out such a return for not including an income item, then a person (IRS employee) takes over and reviews the rest of the return. From reviewing the many changes to the return that are in the CP2000 notice, it is very, very, very evident that the employee absolutely does not know what he/she is doing! I always try to figure out before we contact IRS what they did wrong and I've been playing with figures all afternoon. This is what I found: Spouse received an IRA withdrawal due to the death of one of her parents. The withdrawal was coded "4". The total withdrawal of the IRA PLUS the amount withheld in Federal taxes were BOTH added to the spouses WAGES....thus they are saying that the spouse's wages were underreported on the return. The withholding on the IRA withdrawal that was included on Line 62 is gone.....poof! It was noted in the CP2000 letter than an error was made on the total withholding. (Remember IRS added it in with the spouse's wages as INCOME). With the additional income (the IRA was already reported on the original return) added to the couple's income, now their education credit is lowered because they are over the threshold. Now my clients have a bill for over $1,000. This is by far the most pitiful case I have ever had where an employee really screwed up a return....certainly not the ONLY time, just the most pitiful job of screwing it up! I will follow up and get my clients to send in the $3.00 they owe (+interest...lol), however, after we receive the final "case closed" correspondence from IRS, I will forward the whole package to the Ways and Means Committee who I believe is over IRS. If not, I will find out exactly who to send it to. I have often complained about my local H & R Block office, but from what I've seen lately coming out of the IRS office itself, I do believe H & R is gaining ground on them and at a fast pace also! Thanks for listening! I feel better now!!!!

Whether you are left or right, you should find this "advertisement" funny. I got a real kick out of it. http://teamcoco.com/video/52648/conservotax-the-new-tax-software-for-republicans

Apparently there is a video on how to learn how to dance brought to by your friends at ........ http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/bestoftv/2013/06/03/exp-irs-dance-video-bash.cnn#/video/bestoftv/2013/06/03/exp-irs-dance-video-bash.cnn

Tom, I will contact you directly, don't want to lose touch, for sure. You may have noticed I've been pretty much staying out of most of it, [my tongue is getting pretty sore ] but I think those couple of new members who have been flinging gas on the fire may get bored soon. Eric is right, it has gotten out of hand, because certain posters can't respect any difference of opinion. Hopefully, it's going to improve.

>>John and Jainen have given the best advice<< Thank you. John had several good suggestions, so take your pick. I only had one, but I prefer it. Especially the penultimate word, which doesn't get enough use in this good-hearted forum.

Hi Joan -- The Progressive Party USA was founded by _Republican_ Teddy Roosevelt. Historical fact; look it up. Read the various stances of the progressives; compare and contrast with the current stances of the overall GOP, and then with the stances of the abolitionist/civil rights stances Republican Party as personified by Republican Abraham Lincoln, Republican Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, and others. You will quickly see what lines up and what does not. Both major parties basically want more power to central government, as that assures their own importance and ability to profit - and to impose their own social agendas, which is not supposed to be federal jurisdiction at all (those matters are left, by the Constitution, to the states). The difference is only one of speed. Full-progressive and progressive-lite are the two flavors on the national stage. And one reason why it doesn't seem to make any difference who gets elected! As for Publius Huldah -- read her articles (linked below) on rights, the 1st Amendment. Please note the lady is a retired attorney who has studied the Constitution and the Federalist Papers for decades; her scholarship is stunning in its depth and breadth. http://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/2010/10/31/do-our-rights-come-from-god-the-constitution-the-supreme-court-or-congress-2/ http://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/category/1st-amendment/ As for your assertion that women and minorities were not included and were never meant to be included -- partially true. Yet the words they used were carefully chosen to be inclusive. I have never understood why it is that the same people (general statement; not finger-pointing at you) who insist on holding the Founders and Framers to the standards we hold today, also insist we hold other contemporaneous cultures only to their own standards -- and cry that to do otherwise is racist/sexist/"culturist" and other terms. They were flawed people; there was only ever One who was not. The Declaration and Constitution are not perfect -- yet they strove as best they could. Evaluated by the standards of their day, they were prescient about rights, and set the stage for the freest and most prosperous society the world has ever seen. At the time the Constitution was written, of the 13 states, fully nine had legal ownership of slaves (eight by 1789, when the Constitution was ratified). Yet they still wrote into the document wording that was to set the stage for the abolition of slavery only twenty years later. Had Eli Whitney's cotton gin been only another decade or so delayed in invention and widespread use, the whole disgusting issue could have been resolved before "king cotton" made the fight so much more prolonged and horrific. As for the internal debates -- if you read Madison's notes on the Convention and the journals and letters of attendees, they saw the dichotomy and struggled with it personally. George Washington never bought a slave after the Declaration was written. He was given them, and did not sell them -- and took pains to keep families together. Why not free them? He didn't have the cash. Virginia, at that time, required a cash bond to be paid, sufficient to support the freed slave for the rest of their life, upon manumission. But manumitting slaves also meant they would be outside of his ability to protect. Washington didn't have that kind of money, and did feel that level of responsibility -- so he did the best he could, and freed his slaves upon his death. Jefferson, in much the same boat, could not free his slaves upon his death -- Virginia had changed the law, and that course was no longer open to him.

Guess I got lucky again. Updated, no problems with opening program or returns or adding new forms. The program still opens slower than I would like but I found it opens much quicker for me if I close out of it and reopen. I don't do it often, just checking. I strategically hope that I have not now jinxed myself. Although I have had very very few issues KNOCK LOTS OF WOOD I decided for the first time to not renew early. The 10% discount with another paltry 5% maybe added by the rep was not enough to sway me this time. I can live with this another year if it doesn't get worse as my practice is small and my patience is fairly abundant. YMMV...

>>a local or state divorce decree certainly can't trump the Federal tax code. The splitting of employment and self-employment income absolutely makes no sense<< It makes sense in community property states, where the court DOES determine how income must be allocated and reported on the federal return. That's in the federal tax code. And even though a divorce decree can not over-ride federal law, it DOES bind the two parties themselves in the way they must apply the law.

I have noticed an increasing trend in the last several years of letters from the IRS (and my state, too, to a lesser degree) claiming all kinds of problems that do not, in fact, exist. "Unreported sales" that were properly reported, 1099-Q distributions as taxable when used to pay education costs and so reported, etc. It's like they put their computer algorithms on super-sensitive, and then handed the results to the newest of the newbies for review. In times past, I saw 3-6 letters a year that clients received. Starting in about 2008 (after the real estate bubble burst, the economy tanked, and tax receipts plummeted), that number skyrocketed to over 30 a year. Almost all are completely specious. What hasn't been specious? Example: client claimed $X in estimated taxes, one check of which was not posted as received -- sent them to look for the check so we could dispute. Client found check -- in a folder! - they'd forgotten to send it in. Little things like that. My personal opinion is that they're demanding funds in the hopes people panic and pay, to get more dollars in the coffers.

Thanks to each of you for your responses to my original post. Each of you made a bad day a lot more tolerable! Taxed and Tom, I don’t know if you two are serious or not, however, you both need to get together and perform live in comedy clubs. You both would find instant stardom! No joke!!!! Funny thing is that I agree with both of you! You both made me laugh today and lately my laughing doesn’t come easy! So, I thank you both! John, I appreciated your input very much! Part of the reason I posted my original rant was to see if these type situations are about to become the “norm”. I’m afraid we might be beginning to see a trend occurring. I just wonder if someone is enjoying the extra work they are creating for taxpayers or preparers or if it is simply a matter of incompetent employees. Both thoughts are worrisome. Even more concerning is the fact that especially older taxpayers have a tendency to pay any bill they receive from IRS as they are horrified of owing IRS anything! It is very hard to believe that amployee who has the position of correcting a tax return lacks the knowledge to check the existing Sch D in a return for a $275K sale prior to sending the taxpayer a bill for not having reported it. I feel like you when you stated you had “no idea why they missed it”. Sounds suspicious to me. Jack, you probably hit the nail on the head with your statement that the administration wants the public “to feel as much pain as possible….” Another scary thought, but what else are we to believe? Ms. TabbyKats, I’m with you on changing my policy also. If a simple oversight will cause as much worry and grief to my clients (and me) when the computer finds they left off an item on their return, they will be forewarned and encouraged to go ahead and pay to have the return amended before IRS’s computers finds the unreported item of income and thus receives a bill for much more than the omission itself. It’s simply not worth it to ignore an item any more even if the resulting tax is $1. The first year that the $3,000 exemption for public safety officers came into effect, my brother and sister-in-law got a CP2000 telling them they made a mistake on their return to the tune of $3,000 in taxable income due to the 1099-R and ALSO they “made a mistake in calculating their taxable social security”. I would have rather personally received a letter saying I owed an additional $10K on my personal return than these two people to receive a letter telling them they owed an additional $ .25. Anyway, I placed a call and right away the lady I spoke with told me that their computer system was not yet set up to read the “PSO” that appears when there’s an adjustment (IRS has since corrected it) for a public safety officer. I then asked her why the Lump Sum Distribution wasn’t recognized on the Social Security received for that year. She instantly told me that there is no reason why the employee should not have seen that it was a Lump Sum Distribution and she relayed her aggravation about the situation to me during the call. That is the reason (in addition to other calls I have made is that I feel whenever numbers don’t match up during the cross check of income statements, an employee takes over and reviews the entire return before notifying the taxpayer of the additional taxes that are owed.) Therein lies the problem….are the employees really not literate enough about the tax code to perform his/her job or is it a “game” they have begun to play to occupy themselves as computers have pretty much taken over their positions. jainen, I understand where you are coming from as I also don’t mind a tad bit of incompetency as it came in handy approximately 35 years ago on my personal audit. I had used the $5,000 death exclusion for part of the taxable income I received when my father died. Before the actual audit, I discovered that the death benefit exclusion ended the year prior if memory serves me correctly. When the auditor asked me about the $5,000, I threw out some code citings, etc.. in a matter of fact tone. My heart dropped when she told me she had to talk to her supervisor about the exemption. Approximately 30 minutes later she came back and told me that I was correct (I’m sure she had a good coffee break). A “tad bit” of incompetency is different from total incompetency. I wish you could see this correspondence my clients received. The more I think about it, it HAS to be a “let’s aggravate the taxpayer and preparer situation”. And before you say it, I know, it could be a pay back to me from the Death Benefit Exclusion that had expired. This one is not going to be handled by a simple phone call. In fact, I don’t trust myself to have a live conversation with an IRS employee regarding the garbage my clients received. As always, thanks for “the other way of looking at things” in your responses. Take care all, Cathy 6/3/13 Just edited to change the font. Sorry about the "calligraphy" if anyone else tried to read my response on their iphone. I don't know where that font came from....I know it made me nauseated trying to read it!

I have been disturbed for years!! Sanity is WAY overrated!!

>>keep your political zealotry to your own threads<< I agree, and offer two more aspects. First, The IRS is inherently political, so even technical issues might bring up legitimate political questions. For example, tax professionals must deal with the new fraud and identity theft initiatives. Tax planning also calls for understanding politcal trends in tax rates, deductions, AMT, etc. But what made me sign off a few weeks ago was the name-calling and other personal attacks. That shouldn't be tolerated, even in a political forum.

Here, here! Now that said, I have a tendency to be somewhat. OK, blatantly obvious from a religious perspective with some of my posts. If I have offended anyone, I would like to say I am sorry, but I can't. Because you see, there is no separation in MY life between religious and not religious. It is who I am. And who I will always be. Moderate if you must for the good of the order. But politics is another story all together. I have read some of the posts and find them to be very disturbing. Common sense, decency and respect are lost, not just in this forum, but in the general society in which we live. Please moderate! And thank you for stepping up!

>><<the Mortgage Forgiveness Act expired for 2013<< Well, first of all, that was extended to 12/31/13, so it still applies if the California mortgage was refinanced or was otherwise a recourse loan. (Remember that the amount excluded reduces the basis of the property, so there could still be capital gain even though property values dropped.) It never applied to a non-recourse loan, such as the original purchase mortgage. There can't be any C.O.D. income to exclude because the loan is satisfied in full by the foreclosure (or short sale the lender agrees to). So capital gain is calculated from the mortgage balance, regardless of the actual sale price. In either case the mortgage balance does not include accrued interest for homeowners who decided to stop making payments . If the lender bothers to put that on a 1099-C, it can't be excluded under Mortgage Forgiveness or Section 121.