Leaderboard

A man visits his aunt in a nursing home. It turns out that she is taking a nap, so he just sits down in a chair in her room, flips through a few magazines, and munches on some peanuts sitting in a bowl on the table. Eventually, the aunt wakes up, and her nephew realizes he's absentmindedly finished the entire bowl. "I'm so sorry, auntie, I've eaten all of your peanuts!" "That's okay, dearie," the aunt replied... "After I've sucked the chocolate off, I don't care for them anyway."

Good one! and I like the title of the thread.

I was just on the phone with a client and bookmarked the irs.healthcare website. I had no issues accessing the IRS website or the healthcare site. Hmmmmmm? I suppose next time I try, it will churn and churn.

You don't suppose opponents have turned on robo-call machines to make sure the system overloads? Naw, only liberals use dirty tricks.

michael, there is a huge difference between losing money in a business, or filing bankruptcy due to things outside your control, such as losing a business due to illness, etc, and using YOUR EMPLOYEE'S money as your own. Please don't treat them as the same thing.

Get your retainer up front.

Not surprised, since those gov employees, once the furlong is ended, almost always get the 'missed' pay anyway. Amounts then to a paid vacation.

washington, D.C. (September 27, 2013) By Daniel Hood The Internal Revenue Service continues to have problems with its Collections Due Process Program, according to a recent government report. The program is supposed to help taxpayers exercise their right to appeal with the IRS files a lien or notice of intent to levy against them, but the report by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration indicates that the service is still plagued by many of the problems that characterized the program last year. Specifically, the IRS Office of Appeals did not always classify taxpayer requests properly and, as a result, some taxpayers received the wrong type of hearing; errors continued relating to the determination of the collection statute expiration date on taxpayer accounts; and Appeals personnel did not always document their impartiality statement in hearing notification letters issued to taxpayers. TIGTA also identified delays in the initial processing of requests for hearings prior to receipt by Appeals personnel. Some taxpayer requests for a hearing took over 90 days to reach Appeals personnel, which could have affected the taxpayer’s due process rights. The inspector general recommended that the chief of appeals correct the taxpayer accounts that were identified with collection statute expiration date errors. In response, IRS management stated that all errors on the taxpayers’ accounts had been corrected. The full report is available here .

Not mine Margaret, I have to give credit to the VFW Magazine. I thought it was cute when I read it, so I passed it on here.

A vacation should qualify as a medical expense required for maintaining your mental health. Losses at a casino should be allowed as an educational expense to improve your skills in your present occupation--since it is always a gamble when you enter a deduction or fail to report some income. Doing EIC returns is the biggest gamble of them all.

I appreciate what you said earlier about serving your client's interests professionally without regard to the ethics of failure to pay. And I agree entirely, having no knowledge whatsoever of the facts. I still don't see that you are properly positioned for an Offer in Compromise. First, I want to clear up a definition. The Trust Fund Recovery Penalty includes only the payroll taxes that were actually withheld from employees' wages. It does not include the employer half of FICA or any penalties related to the company's failure to pay. You are right to recommend she pay that personally, because she is probably going to have to anyway. Although you continue to confuse me on this point, it sounds like the Offer in Compromise will be filed by the corporation, not the shareholder. The IRS will probably look at the shareholder's relationship if corporate assets (including compensation) were transferred to her. Even if the IRS closes the corporate account, that may not protect your client. This is something you need to think through. You seem to have a goal of getting the debt discharged rather than compromised, but that doesn't make a very strong offer. I mentioned the difficulty of correctly identifying the debt to be compromised. Another caution is that the IRS will apply any payments in a way that benefits the government, which is very likely not what you would choose. There may be ways to control that; again, you have to think about this carefully.