Leaderboard

This is just a rant about California FTB Client is a non-filer for several years. FTB has been zapping their bank account based on SFR's for the non-filed years. So we get the bookkeeping done and prepare the tax returns for the 5 years in question. 4 returns show a balance due and one shows a refund because the FTB levies were applied to that year (we took this off the FTB transcript). FTB has accepted all of the returns that show a balance due, but sent a notice concerning the refund year. The notice says that to prevent identity theft, they cannot process the return unless the taxpayer provides all W2's, 1099's, year to date paystubs, social security cards and driver's licenses. All five returns were sent at the same time, but only the one with a refund was selected for Identity Theft additional screenings? Bull$hipt! It is not an Identity Theft issue. It is the state dragging their feet on paying a refund (which is not going to be paid anyway - it will just be applied to the balance due). Rant over. Tom Newark, CA (Soon to be Modesto, CA)

Feels good getting it off your chest doesn't it? Wish I had a dollar for everything that comes up and I can't do diddly about it. Maybe tax problems will be more modest in Modesto.

Me? Hold the checks until the day the DD posts. Pay before the 8th day after the period end. Some payroll vets say the solution is to mail the checks the day the DD is sent to the bank, which makes the arrive about the same time. Looking at what could be the HI current regs (I do not trust the reference, since HI is not always keen on keeping current online), the pay lag may be moot. One part says within 7 days, one says within 15 days. Having the conflicting statements could negate both. http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/vol07_ch0346-0398/hrs0388/HRS_0388-0002.htm --- And I am also on the side of employers doing only what is required, nothing more, nothing less. Perfect case of "no good deed goes unpunished". Employee says please DD to for me - employer agrees. Later, employee claims they did not get their pay, since soon to be ex spouse was faster to clean out the account. Employer may win the case, but defense is not free. Many employers think DD is cheaper and easier, when the opposite is true. Not only the actual hard costs of processing, but the time to setup, admin, and audit another pay method... The one case where it makes sense (to me) is if the employer self prepares payroll, and is in a local where they can require all to DD. This gives the employer the ability to prepare and pay off site, removing the need for a system to create and distribute on site. Huge value to the employer to be able to handle business from the beach! --- A loan stipulation based on having DD sounds like a payday loan shark who sets up an auto withdrawal. Agreed, none of the employer's concern. Falls in line with the employees who ask for proof of wages and future employment (beyond a tax return signed under penalty of perjury) as a means for the lender to hook the employer in the liability chain. Lenders will often offer a lower rate for auto payment - I personally have not seen one based on how I get money in my accounts.

If I was guessing I would say all the assets had been fully depreciated in prior years right or wrong but fully deducted. If I did his taxes it would only be current and forward from current information. Let the past be the past.

In my area, several local banks will waive monthly service charges and account minimums on checking accounts provided you have at least one direct deposit. This might be why the employee wants direct deposit. Or maybe she finds it inconvenient to go to the bank. Who knows? I figure the employee is allowed to ask for anything, and the employer is allowed to say no, unless it is required by statute.

Thank you to the OP for posting. While I cannot add to what the others have responded, I appreciate the reminder we are not alone with these types of things - that sometimes saying no and suggesting seeking someone who specializes in the issue (without giving a specific referral) is the best course.

Is there depreciation expense on page 1? It could be that the assets are being depreciated - but just not showing up on the Schedule L. Just a thought. And the other thought, I agree with others, although I would be inclined to take on the project, it would not be without a very sizable retainer.

Someone is not doing much thinking on this. If the employer did not offer direct deposit, then the client would have had to go to another lender. Usually the reason for someone accepting this condition is that the bank will offer them an incentive, like lower closing costs, or a lower rate.

Make sure the box in the 2848 is checked to instruct the IRS to send copies of notices to the POA. ATX defaults to an unchecked box. I have made a 2848 template with that box checked so I do not overlook it.

For any of our members that will be affected by hurricane Harvey, you are all in my prayers that everyone remains safe and unharmed.

Amen!

I'll second that. I have trained with the Southern Baptist Disaster Relief crews and sure don't want to see any of you in harms way.

One crucial question before your final decision to take this client: do you have a nice big desk with a goodly and comfy space underneath it? Big enough to hide in for a while, with your jumbo-sized bag of Skittles (or snack of choice), when it gets overwhelming? If not, refuse the engagement!

Pull the wage & income transcript? No state info... just federal. But federal affects her visa more than state anyway.

Over the years, I have fired more than one client when I became convinced that the information I was getting could not be trusted. I am NOT saying these clients were crooks! Some of them were in over their heads but refused help; others just overwhelmed. Also computer crashes with no backups, shaky paper records, and no time/unwilling to take time to re-create. We've all seen multiple reasons. (And the ones you just don't trust - the ones where you count the toner cartridges when they leave.) You are putting your professional reputation at risk, and taking a chance on nasty preparer penalties. If you decide to take it on, get a BIG retainer, start from scratch with original records, and work your way forwards. You might also work with a tax attorney from the start (getting them to hire you to do returns gives *you* privilege as well as protects you; your work will be submitted under the attorney's aegis). If the prior preparer's machines were seized, starting with an attorney might be a good move even if all the records are pristine. If they went after the preparer, they are going to scrutinize the returns he prepared.

Just nosy --- Did you file the 2010 and up returns so the statute of limitations applies? Yes, there may be no money consequences BUT maybe something in her upcoming VISA and of course Green Card requirements. With things as they are today, all T's corssed and I's dotted.

And stops CO from trying to prosecute some poor dumb schmuck who sells one single $500 item to CO in a year.

The answer depends on the area the wages are being paid and the type of pay the employee receives. For example, you may be able to pay salaried workers biweekly or bimonthly, but hourly employees might require weekly payments. Union bargaining agreements may spell out different requirements for payments to workers. Some government contracts require weekly payment of wages. Sales commissions might be paid quarterly or monthly or biweekly or weekly (or weakly). The answer is not just that simple, especially with the limited information provided. Tom Newark, CA (soon to be Modesto, CA)

THIRTY EIGHT-plus minutes on hold listening to that miserable aggravating muzak the IRS torments us with, to get a recording saying "Due to technical difficulties, we are unable to answer your call at the present time. Please try again later." Click. Excuse me?!?! You couldn't have said that within the first TEN minutes? I don't often yell into my phone, but this time I did. Don't recall using any potty-mouth words but I won't guarantee that, either. I'm so mad I could kick someone into the next county right about now.

ROTFLMAO!!! I just KNEW this board would take my aggravation and make me laugh instead.

If you are not particular, I could use a trip right about now.

Then they need to start putting fax numbers on the stupid letters. Instead, they give phone numbers (sometimes plural) and say to call for a number if you need to fax in a response. So professionals tie up the lines looking for a frimping fax number, only to get disconnected by bad phone systems. the phone maintenance people are the ones needing a spanking. If they're going to hang up on people, it should be immediately , not after three quarters of an hour or more.

Oh, that was yesterday? I was in the dark. I may as well have been, didn't notice anything. I have memories of '79, but remember the one in the 60s when our neighbor Mr Corso made all the kids cardboard cutout devices for viewing. I still had my "13 Ghosts" 3D glasses but was told they were useless for viewing.

NOT intended to be political. I think it is the IRS' duty to prove they have taken steps *not* to be used as a political tool, by ANYONE. They have enough legitimate work to do, and not enough people to do it, as it is! Judge orders IRS to respond by October 16

I agree with you on this. They have had several years working on this already; the information the judge wants should be available within a week. Maybe two if he wants pretty copies, arranged in date order and bound.

This is a great thing! My only issue with it is why do they have so much time to respond. The State that I call home uses the standard practice for taxpayers to respond to their notices within 15 days. I am personally taking the State to task on that policy. And even the IRS does not give the taxpayer that much time usually. Nonetheless, this is a very great development. Thanks for sharing this.