Leaderboard

One just dropped off. "Hey, I got unemployment, they held out taxes, and ain't never sent me a thing on it." You don't say. Those slackers.

When I fall flat on the floor, I take that as a sign that I needed a five minute nap anyway and just go with that while I am down there!

Only if you take me your tax preparer.

I will say two things: I do feel that tax season has not started and some of the answers are too hard on this board. I don't mind if they do it to me but we have to be sensitive to other people. If we continue to be hard on people, we are going to lose good people and that's not the idea of this forum. I don't send the organizer to my people (so, to an extent I agree with Jack). I feel that if people answer the organizer correctly, the tax preparer only plugs in numbers on the tax software. (That's my personal choice). So, not having a lot of questions about ACA on the organizer is not an issue for me. Keep in mind that only 20% of the population will be affected by ACA, so for a lot of our clients ACA doesn't apply because they will check yes to: Did you and the people on your return have insurance all year?

Congratulation, Jack. Great accomplishment. It demonstrates the same perserverance and stick-to-your guns worldview you exhibit on this forum. Well done.

Well, I could use some chocolate. Just sayin.

CT also has the 1099Gs online. And, we stocked up on chocolate at the factory outlets after Christmas. My hubby is taking no chances that I'll get even crankier!

Well, I'll have to wait till the 1099-G gets here. And, no, this guy will not be finding it online. Just trust me on this. But I have a stash of Santa Twix for hard times.

Here is a link that maybe very helpful that answers a lot of questions that we and our clients may have. If you need to determine the eligibility for an exemption while preparing the tax return, this site has the 2014 and 2015 market rates for the bronze plans for all States. The link will take you to Burlington, NC which is my main target area but you can navigate to any city once there. For Bronze - http://www.legalconsumer.com/obamacare/rates.php?CITY=Burlington&ST=NC

This helped answer some of my "procedural" questions on the ATX software --- From a comment on the ATX site made 11/17/14: The software will include the IRS instructions and forms, however there are several pieces of data that you must obtain from the client and enter manually. If the taxpayer had full coverage all year, then you will just need to check the box on line 61 of the 1040. If the taxpayer receives a 1095-A, you will need to complete Part II of the 8962. If there is a difference between the Premium Tax Credit calculated and the Advanced Premium Tax Credit received, it will flow to line 46 if the taxpayer received too much or line 69 if the taxpayer did not receive enough. If the taxpayer didn't have insurance or is claiming an exemption, you will need to fill out form 8965. If the taxpayer claimed an exemption through the marketplace, then the preparer will enter the Exemption number in Part I. (The taxpayer would provide that exemption ID number to you) If the taxpayer is claiming an exemption on the tax return, then you will select the exemption in Part III. If the taxpayer did not have insurance, then you will have to complete the Shared Responsibility Payment worksheet for each member of the household that didn't have insurance and the total amount will flow to line 61 of the 1040. Note: Part I, Part III and the Shared Responsibility Payment worksheet could be filled in the same return depending when the exemptions or lack of coverage apply. It is also possible that a 8962 and 8965 could be completed in the same return if the taxpayer had insurance for part of the year. Stephanie B Customer Care Director

In light of the circumstances, I see no reason not to have both.

My phone has been crazy busy today, and frankly I'm not ready. I've been trying to get over the flu and am so far behind. It's going to be a long long long season I do believe

We discovered on New Year's Eve that Prosecco goes great with chocolate. Hubby's birthday is today, so maybe we'll do that again tonight. Or, is red a good pairing with dark chocolate? Did you see the 60 Minutes re pot pairings with food and drink?

Dammit, I have no money for chocolate yet! Someone send me some, and hurry, I'm getting desperate!

My apologies to David for making any suggestion about his choice of software, but not for deleting the pdf. Once he utilized the information to create his own page of questions, I did leave that text up in both this thread and the one in the ACA forum also. FWIW, Drake DOES have a problem with the direct scan of its materials. I spoke with a company representative this morning and he was shocked to see that its one support page, current organizer, and practice return are accessible by the public. He confirmed what I already know, that Drake's support section is NOT for public consumption and is meant to be for only purchasers of Drake software, and is accessible with a user name and password via their support link on their site. He said Drake copyrighted materials should NOT be included in seminars or posted online without their permission, and was distressed to learn that the specific material I was talking about is the ACA portion of the organizer because, obviously, this is the brand new portion of their current product. All of this information is being sent up to the powers that be about the support site and the materials being included in a seminar package, and he said that Drake always goes after those that use their materials without permission. Drake has their own complete training center, their own presenters, and host seminars all over the country and online for their users. They have no need for their materials to be spread or used by outsiders for marketing or to impress anyone, especially when they have no control over how that person will present their materials. Yeah, I need a lot of chocolate...and maybe a chaser of something else too!

David, I want to apologize for the way Judy and Jack jumped on you. Please know that I realize that you were just trying to be helpful, As you know, while this board started back in 2007 when CCH killed their Community board on April 10. Since then, they restarted theirs, but we kept ours! Over the years, some of our members have changed to other software but stayed here for the 'community'. Judy now uses Drake, some use Pro-series, etc. ​I see no problem with you linking to a publicly available form. My guess is that Drake made it available as a way to impress preparers that might see it as a reason to consider buying their product. A simple marketing decision. ​Thanks for the input, and please do not let this thread turn you off this board, I for one am happy to see you here. I think Judy needs some chocolate !

If your client made no Roth contribution in 2012 but was eligible to, the excess from 2011 can be counted as a 2012 contribution. That does not negate the 2011 penalty - but it does stop an endless carry-forward of the excess.

We are kindred spirits, Gail. It's like a zen moment. Just lean into it. So to speak.

CONGRATULATIONS! Way to stick with it!

There was recently a new CCA (Chief Counsel Advice) on the SE tax question relating to limited partners. You can see the full text of the ruling at CCA 201436049. The email I received follows below. I've seen where CCA's pulled a lot of weight over other IRS Memos, etc..even to the extent that returns would be audited to make sure the taxpayer followed the CCA's procedures regarding sensitive issues. I realize the CCA doesn't directly answer JB's initial question, however, I did see where several members of the forum say that limited partners owe SE taxes regardless, which can be in direct conflict with the CCA. Towards the end of the email highlighted in blue is the basic findings in the CCA. Limited partner income in LLCs probably not subject to SE tax Is this email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser Unsubscribe from this list Dear Tax Professional, Western CPE is committed to presenting cutting-edge tax law, case analysis, and case presentation to you so that you are always in the know. When you attend one of our annualFederal Tax Update seminars, you will not only receive the most comprehensive tax manual available, you will get season-long manual updates and breaking news straight to your inbox. Just take a look below as we present the IRS’s latest update on self-employment tax for LLC members. Be sure to sign up for one of our seminars today—seating is limited! Warm regards, Vern Hoven, CPA, with a Master’s in Tax eTax Alert™ IRS (Finally) Discusses SE Tax for LLC Members A new Chief Counsel Advice (CCA) addresses the issue of when LLC members are subject to self-employment (SE) tax on their distributive share of LLC income. Section1402(a)(13) provides that the distributive share of income of a limited partner is not included in self-employment income¹. Accordingly, limited partners are not subject to SE tax. Is an LLC member like a limited partner? If an LLC member is treated like a limited partner, the LLC member would not be subject to SE tax on his or her share of the LLC income. In 1997 (yes, 17 years ago), the IRS issued proposed regulations² that would have determined when the distributive share of LLC income is included in the member’s SE income. The regulations were never finalized, even though LLCs are now recognized in all 50 states, and more than 2.1 million LLCs file Form 1065 each year. Finally in a new CCA, the IRS discusses the SE tax issue. Note: The first LLCs were established in Wyoming in 1977. Management Company LLC provides services to a family of funds. In the CCA, the Office of the Chief Counsel looked at a large investment management company organized as an LLC that acts as the manager of a family of funds, each organized as a limited partnership. The investment management company, Management Company LLC, generally has full authority and responsibility to manage and control the affairs and business of each fund. Thus, Management Company LLC is primarily responsible for carrying out the extensive market research and trading activity of each of the funds. It carries on all investment activities, such as the purchasing, managing, restructuring, and selling of the funds’ investment assets. Members of Management Company LLC and its employees provide these extensive services to the funds. Management Company LLC’s primary source of income is from fees for providing management services to the funds. Members were treated as employees of Management Company LLC. The members of Management Company LLC worked full-time, performing a wide range of professional services, including services related to investment management, analysis, trading, portfolio management, accounting and tax, information technology, etc. Each member was paid wages and received a Form W‑2 from Management Company LLC. Note: Rev. Rul. 69-184 states that “members of a partnership are not employees of the partnership.” The members should have been compensated with a guaranteed payment. It is likely that Management Company LLC paid wages to its members so that it could make the argument that follows regarding reasonable compensation. Management Company LLC says its members should be treated like S Corporation employee/shareholders. On its Form 1065, Management Company LLC treated all of its members as limited partners not subject to self‑employment tax on their distributive share. Management Company LLC stated that the “wage” amounts represent “reasonable compensation” for each member, and that each member is a limited partner with respect to his or her distributive share. Management Company LLC reasoned that because Management Company LLC has the same role and business as the S corporation it succeeded, it can continue to apply the same “reasonable compensation” wage rules applicable to corporations. However, if Management Company LLC wanted its members to have the same tax treatment as S corporation shareholders, then it should have stayed an S corporation. The LLC must obey partnership tax law. Management Company LLC members perform services for the business. Members perform extensive investment and operational management services for the LLC in their capacity as members (i.e., acting in the manner of self‑employed persons) and Management Company LLC derives its income described in §702(a)(8) from the investment management services performed by its members. The income earned by members through Management Company LLC is not income that is basically of an investment nature of the sort that Congress sought to exclude from self‑employment tax when it enacted the predecessor to §1402(a)(13). Accordingly, members of Management Company LLC are not limited partners within the meaning of §1402(a)(13), and they are subject to self‑employment tax on their distributive shares of Management Company LLC’s income described in §702(a)(8). Why are limited partners different? Section 1402(a)(13) was enacted to exclude for coverage purposes certain earnings that are basically of an investment nature and akin to that of a passive investor. The applicable statute did not, and still does not, define a “limited partner³.” In 1997, the Treasury Department and the IRS promulgated proposed regulations defining “limited partner” for §1402(a)(13) purposes. The proposed regulations (which were never finalized) generally provide that an individual is treated as a limited partner unless the individual: Has personal liability for the debts of or claims against the partnership by reason of being a partner, Has authority to contract on behalf of the partnership, or Participates in the partnership’s trade or business for more than 500 hours. Additionally, the 1997 proposed regulations provided that service providers in service partnerships (e.g., law firms, accounting firms, and medical practices) may not be limited partners. The 1997 proposed regulations applied to all partnerships (including LLCs). What did we learn from the CCA? If the member performs services in the business of the LLC, the IRS position is clearly that the member’s distributive share of LLC income is subject to SE tax. If the member’s ownership interest resembles that of a limited partner, in that he or she cannot participate and does not participate in the business of the LLC, the distributive share of LLC income is probably not subject to SE tax. Planning idea: For years, we have been saying, “Put it in writing.” If you want your member to be treated like a limited partner, then the LLC operating agreement should spell out that the member is a “non-managing member” and restrict the member’s ability to participate in the management of the LLC’s business. If the member’s income is like a limited partner’s, then it will be passive (§469) and may be subject to the new 3.8% tax on net investment income. See the full text of the ruling at CCA 201436049. ¹Guaranteed payments as described in §707© are included in self-employment income for general and limited partners. ²Congress imposed a “temporary” moratorium on finalizing the 1997 proposed regulations, which expired in 1998. ³At the time of the statute’s enactment, the Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act of 1976 provided that a “limited partner” would lose his limited liability protection if, in addition to the exercise of his rights and powers as a limited partner, he takes part in the control of the business. Revised Unif. Ltd. Pship. Act (1976), sec. 303(a), 6B U.L.A. 180 (2008). Sharon Kreider © 2014

Hey KC, Patty likes that one. Tom Newark, CA

JACK --- Congratulations! Not just for the EA (which in itself is more than warranted -- but -- also for your perseverance and willingness to help others with your knowledge. THANKS! On another post --- JACK stated: My journey has been three and a half years. Took all three tests at once, Feb. 2010. Passed #1 & #3, failed #2. Over the next 2 years I took #2 three additional times and failed all three. By this time, the time had expired on #1 & #3, so I had to start over. Test# 1 - Individuals Test# 2 - Businesses Test# 3 - Representation, Practices and Procedures. July 2012 I purchased the Gleim study course for businesses (#2). Lots of seminars, IRS forums etc., and I felt ready to take #2. My plan was to be sure I passed #2 before I took tests #1 & #3. There is an audio study portion of that program. I downloaded them, burned them on CD's and for a year listened as I was driving. 30 minutes each way to work, and anywhere else I went by myself. Their study program is also very good because it will create simulated tests. When you take the test, you can see what the correct answer is, but more importantly, it explains why the answer is correct as well as telling you why the other answers are wrong. Dec. 29, 2014 I took and passed Test# 2. I asked the fellow at Prometric 3 times if he was kidding me. He smiles and handed me the paper with proof. Jan. 2, 2015 I took the other two tests. Passed them both. I knew I would have no problems with #1 & #3 because those relate to the largest part of my experience.

This is where I store my resources as well! And I don't trip over them all that often anymore. What's a couple of face plants per season anyhow?

"It appears ‪#‎IRS‬ will be holding refunds on returns with American Opportunity Tax Credits until the 201519 cycle (Mid-May) so they can verify receipt of the 1098T from the colleges and universities. Taxpayers should be informed of the reason the refund is being held and that once the 1098-T from the accredited institution is verified, the refund will be released. Otherwise, they will receive a letter (4800C) to inform them if further documentation is required to allow the education credit." Center for Agricultural Law and Taxation at Iowa State University Source: https://www.facebook.com/centeraglawandtax

Thank you to the multiple posters on this thread and JKLCPA for pinning this thread in the forum. New law, new filing requirements, new skills.

You bet!!!!!

I actually got all the bookkeeping done for my husband's 1065; all reports printed and can start working on it when the phone isn't ringing. I am not liking this already. Forgot about all the interruptions. I'm with Deb; not ready and thinking it will be a long season. New clients calling to reserve a spot right along with the old. Consultation first thing this AM. Client is now going to set up payroll (as she should) but has been paying her subs WAY too much to the point of having little to nothing left for herself. Yippee!!!! I truly don't have time for this. I am leaning more toward lemon bars than chocolate. Will send my chocolate to Judy (before hubby eats it).

That should take care of it. I just don't want David, or anyone else either, attacked for posting something that is publicly available online. Even if it was public by mistake, that mistake was not David's it was Drake's. Peace, Judy and Jack. Lion, I like Moscato d'Asti with dark Chocolate myself ! I'm not waiting for a birthday either !

Good for you.... you will now have money to buy chocolates. In my case, money for my chocolates will start to come next week.

I believe there is a dab of grey area here and I have not seen any authority cited; including the audit guide or the instructions for 1099-misc. The audit guide is correct in stating that the referral is included in income but makes no reference to S.E. income. In the OP the attorney is an employee of a firm. I believe it is common practice for the firm to receive the referral fee rather than the e'e. So if he receives one referral fee in ten years, it could be argued that was seperate from his "business" of being an employee of the law firm and instead was an isolated activity. Then you can look at Rev. Rul 58-112 for guidance: "In Deputy v. duPont, 308 U.S. 488 (1940), Ct.D. 1435, 1940-1 C.B. 118, it is stated that carrying on a trade or business involves holding one's self out to others as engaged in the selling of goods or services. An isolated or occasional activity is not a business. However, an individual may engage in several trades or occupations either independent of, or in connection with, his principal business. Freedman v. Commissioner, 301 F.2d 359 (5th Cir. 1962); Joseph M. Philbin, 26 T.C. 1159 (1956)." Once you have gotten over that hurdle, you can look at the other elements in determining if the fee is subject to SE income. "Regularity of activities, frequency of transactions, and the production of income are, accordingly, important elements in determining whether an activity will be considered a trade or business for self-employment (SE) tax purposes." (Rev Rul 77-356) Without knowing all the fact and circumstances I could not give an opinion.

34. HRB commercials say they have millions available for us, do you have access to those millions too?

We held our annual partnership meeting in Hawaii, so that makes our trip deductible. (dad mom and son are partners)

CONGRATULATIONS!

Well, JKLCPA, it seems you're wrong about 2014 Drake organizer availability on the internet. When I entered "Drake software 2014 organizer" just now into Google search bar, the second item in the Google list is this link direct to Drake's website: http://support.drakesoftware.com/PDF/practice/Practice7.pdf The 6th page of the PDF is a sample of ficticious name "Neal Geadelli" Health Care Coverage Questionnaire. The sample printed page I received at the seminar had a different sample name that I deleted from my scan using PaperPort editing tools. So, it seems, to me at least, that there is a posting, on the internet, on Drake's public website, of a sample of their 2014 tax organizer readily available to anyone that has access to Google or other search engine. Is Google violating Drake's copyright by listing the PDF? I don't know the answer to that one. I'm a CPA, not a lawyer.....

Congratulations on passing the EA exam. Welcome to the world of complete Circular 230 supervision.

Congratulations!

Is this another one of your hypothetical questions that are only meant to test us here to see if someone would arrive at the correct answer, or something you really didn't need help with? It seems like you already had the answer, and your statement really comes off as rather smug and insulting to say that you are surprised at the correct answers given here.

How to make 11 days feel like 5?

Trying to go paperless is a big battle. As a manager and not an owner, I can't implement all that I'd like to. Trying to implement an appointment scheduler in software was a real agony; one of the owners is "spastic" on the computer mouse and keeps screwing things up in the program. But we can't go back to a paper schedule... it's far too slow, or too inflexible, and of course you can't search it in anything less than "way too long" time. I suspect there's this generational thing going on, and until that generation finally dies off and lets us complete the computerization paradigm, it just can't be done.

Way to go !!! The abuse of the S Corp to avoid SE tax on earnings for personal services is one that needs to be clamped down on hard. The fact that some of the worst abusers have been Senators and Representatives should infuriate every honest taxpayer!

I answered all to the best of my ability. Even after having most of a 2 CE update class Wednesday night cover ACA, there's a lot I don't know still. And, there's a lot of time that I will not spend researching questions that don't concern my clients; I'll answer what I can from the top of my head or my texts. The "shared" policy type questions require calculations probably not done by our software, so until I have a client who needs such, I'm not researching it now while I need to be working on payroll taxes, the prior year returns that I postponed until after 15 October, the 2014 partnership that dropped off today, my hubby's birthday this month, two church fundraisers in January, etc. If OP is still stuck after reading the instructions for Part 4, he can come back here and someone might have time to help him with the math. I need to start 3115s now also. I think they're going to be a lot more time consuming than 8962.

Ha, if I put that sign up I'd spend more time answering clients' questions about all of these things that don't apply to them, or debating about the ACA law in general. No thanks, I don't have time for that!

When are they going to regulate the IRS?

I read that this morning. I was surprised that it didn't appear on the board until now. I am reserving comment as I have already jumped through all the hoops and landed on my head at least once.

Thanks. I logged on and found that I could download, if ever needed. I also have all of my archive discs with their install codes.

Thank you and please leave it there for the entire filing season. Thanks Tom Half way to Newark, CA