Leaderboard

No advanced degree in Math, but I’ll never forget Tom’s post on that problem. Every time I have to do that iterative calculation, I just search for “oh shit” in the ACA forum. Yes, inelegant is the perfect word.

But aren't we being told that SS numbers are not to be used for identification purposes? Why doesn't the IRS ask for PTINs or something else?

I did not even know what "iterative" meant until 2 years ago when I had to calculate the SE HI Deduction for a Sch. C client with the advanced premium credit. Now I hate that word. Pairing it with "inelegant" is perfect. Tom Modesto, CA

Very true. However, if Massachusetts' DOR came in and found me storing client data on unencrypted folders, or sending unprotected-by-passwords emails of client documents, they would have my head on a platter. So my drives are encrypted and I use password protection and NO wireless networking (everything is physical connections) and I cross my i's and dot my t's and just to be sure I cross my i's and dot my t's. NOT because it's "safer" but because the state, in its infinite lack of wisdom, has required procedures that make no sense and I do not want to become the poster child for non-compliance. They can go find some obliviot who keeps everything on a laptop with the password "password" for that!

But some state laws have teeth, so make sure you play within the rules.

This is my personal motto. And my other motto is hug them to measure for the grave in the back yard. My version of arbitrary constant of integration.

And not doing it makes you the low-hanging fruit.

This is going to go down the drain just like the PTIN renewal fee, most of us do not get paid enough to put up with this

Be ready for these new questions because the level of BS that we go through to interact with IRS keeps getting deeper. Maybe we should submit blood tests and DNA samples. jk Below is the text of an article today in AICPAs Journal of Accountancy:

Just tell the employees that the withholding tables changed. As long as they're getting more, they won't complain.

Client comes to your office in their brand new Corvette You: Did you use your refinance/line of credit funds to improve your residence? Client: Of course

To make it worse, when calling, call gets cut off.. too busy to take call.. classic

Nice to read (now un) common sense once in a while. There is no such thing as privacy or security. Anything can be found or accessed, given the needed tools and time. Normal actions, such as locking a door, and trying not to lose your data will keep the casual out. Criminals will always find a way, so insurance and recovery ability is where I put my "worry" time. With that said, as Lion said, we still have to comply with the laws those we elect burden us with, in their attempts to get reelected protect us from ourselves. I have not looked in some time, but there was one tax jurisdiction which had a law essentially preventing anyone from storing employee data online, as it has to be always under the employer's control. I do use encryption and passwords, but only for overall access, and when doing certain things online. Long passwords can make password hacking reasonably hard, and encryption makes internet sniffing a bit tougher.

Personally, I would not worry about what any other person or service calculated. What matters is what you prepare needs to be accurate. (If you are entering last year's after the fact, then no calculation matters, you are stuck entering whatever was done, correct or not.) FWH for 2018, so far, is the same calculation as 2017. Same for MO, since MO is waiting for FWH to be published before publishing theirs. You do not have to interpret any employee intent on their MO W4 type form, you just have to take the employee's information, and use it. The form and calculations work together. http://dor.mo.gov/forms/Withholding Formula_2017.pdf P.S. Most tax agencies also allow an employer to use their own calculation/formula, as long as it calculates with a certain range of the published methods. FWH, for instance, allows a WIDE latitude. CT, as another example, states there is no formula or calculation possible (has to be done through charts and steps), but every payroll software provider has likely done what I did many years ago, and built a formula which exactly matches the charts/steps...

Paid Preparer HOH Due Diligence.pdf

A nice little tidbit to know. A $500 fine for not performing HOH due diligence. CA sometimes requires that a questionnaire be filled for this, which consists of a series of 11 questions. Just holding my breath to see what the IRS wants.

I wish S &H Greens Stamps would come back. Wasn't that like a currency that could be traded and exchanged for goods?

Crypto currency (bitcoin) as a class will never go away even after the prices collapse. It has more than one purpose and there is a TON of demand for those services.

I guess I'm in the minority who doesn't mind verifying my Social Security number and birth date (which they already have) with the IRS to decrease the chance that someone is using my CAF to talk to the IRS.

I just talked to the PPL today and the IRS employee stated that there had been another data breech involving CAF files. She checked my information and informed me that my CAF number was not affected. Seems to me that our procedures are not the problem.

(After regaining my composure after considering logic and/or thinking in politics.) Some source probably pointed out what a W4 change would entail, not only on employers, but on all the states without a separate W4, or with calculations based on the federal calculations and W4, so the wonks were somehow allowed to design calculations using the current W4. There will still be state WH ramifications, which may last several months after the IRS publishes n1036. In the past, when only the bracketology changed, the wonks had calculations published as soon as the bill was signed (if not at 12:01am the day the bill was scheduled to be signed). This time, it is likely taking longer because of running more test scenarios than usual, and since the politicians have all said we would see the change starting as soon as February. I doubt it took longer than a day to design the new calculations.

No, Tom, I think they are talking about the pending changes to the withholding tables.

All Y'all are still talkin' 'bout that dang Obamathingy that makes ya pay up for the exchange money they give ya to git that insurance no one will take? Tom Modesto, CA

Sorry, I never mastered any differential equation. I have nightmares about that dangling spring bouncing back and forth (like a giant slinky toy) and professor asking how how many seconds it would take to stop bouncing. This discussion from 3-4 of you bring back memories of lots of things I couldn't do.

I had client refinance a rental 5 years ago, noticed payoff to Nordstrom Credit Card on closing doc. Every year now, only 81% of interest deducted.

How about shoe size and date of last pedicure? Sheesh. And what about those of us who are not certain of their own blood type?!

Catherine that would be myself. But Differential Equations were my Achilles Heel. It required an integral mind (making something out of nothing) instead of a differential mind (looking at something and dividing it into interactive pieces and parts).

bitcoin in a nutshell.pdf

I think my parents still have some plates they bought/exchanged with the stamps lol.

This is the first example of a global currency. It was inevitable.

The 2018 federal WH calculations will be not require a new W4.

I can see where you might think so, but you are mistaken. I take what any expert would consider realistic steps. The basic step is to use my grey matter at all times, before firing off signals to my fingers. I also keep nothing online which is embarrassing to lose. For the average person (a non keeper of valuable mass data), data recovery is the bigger threat.

I wonder if the new W4 will ask about your kids ages and factor in the 2,000/500 per kid tax credit. Now that exemptions are gone, your withholding is not affected by allowances, unless credits are considered. And they had better eliminate the married checkbox, because if a newly wed couple makes the mistake of both changing their W4 forms to married (happens every year), they're going to owe 12%-24% (or more) of 24,000. Then they'll be screaming about an nonexistent marriage penalty. Instead of the married single checkboxes, they should add a yes/no question: "Do you have a spouse who does not have any income?" Answering yes will tell payroll to use the married withholding tables.

Oooh! Now we get into multi-variant analysis! Shades of advanced calculus (MIT's much-dreaded "18.075" course of song and legend). Took that monster in 1979; passed with a "D" (a passing grade at MIT) and I have never worked harder to pass a class in my entire life than that one. Even my husband (a genius) took it all by itself as a summer course; I took it along with four other classes while working on weekends. Ugh. I lived - barely! About all I remember at this point is the "Method of Frobenius" - not how to DO it, just the name! Oh; and the heat conduction partial differential. For some utterly bizarre reason, anything to do with thermodynamics always made perfect sense to me. Not so much in other areas. I still think Edsel can get his answer using the brute-force and inelegant iterative method.

Calculus won't work for SEHI, because everytime a calculation is made, the parameters change. Calculus works for curves, arcs, parabolas, catenarys & straight lines, at least as far as I remember Calculus & Dif EQ from university classes in the mid 1950's.

From what I've read, there are going to be a million "technical corrections" to the bill before we even have regs. For those of you who don't want to pay attention to any tax bill before it becomes law, don't even try to sink your teeth into this one because even the law is going to be tweaked over and over again. This is what happens when you pass tax reform in a matter of weeks. Even Regan's overhaul didn't go into effect for two years after passage, allowing plenty of time for clarifications.

You mean you haven't mastered partial differential equations?

From what I've seen with my clients, most employers have switched to "restricted" stock options. These are added to W2 income in the year received. If the employee hangs on to them, they become eligible for cap gains rates if kept long enough, with basis being whatever was added to W2 plus expense of sale. Most of my clients in this situation ignore my advice and cash them the day they vest, some adding $200-300k to their income--all taxed at ordinary income rates. How do people who already make $300k+ a year need that money so badly they can't wait a year? I will never be in that situation so I guess I'll never find out.

Whole new security to the site, forcing us all to register again, jumping through a lot of hoops to prove we are who we say we are.