Leaderboard

Hey that reminds me of a post a couple years ago where a member here was spotted in a photo while snoozing at a live seminar. Personally, I prefer webinars so I can snooze at my own desk.

Since we're still beating this dead horse, I'll toss in another lick. One of my pet peeves about seminars (of any type) has always been the Q&A time. Occasionally there are good questions on important matters. Usually there are also some questions asked about complex or unusual singular situations which have narrow application and have virtually no relevance for 99% of the people in attendance. But almost every seminar has someone who asks a question they already know the answer to (or at least they think they do), with their primary purpose being to try and trip up the presenter in a vain attempt to impress everyone else in the room with their superior knowledge. They're usually easy to spot, and that's generally when I get up and leave (unless the signup sheet is held to the end).

No one from our ATX Community Family would ever do this though, John.

Links to illustrated 1045 for an individual, plus see additional information with links that may be accessed at the left of that page: http://irszilla.com/net-operating-losses-nols-individuals-estates-trusts/illustrated-form-1045.htm If using Drake, this KB also has some information and how to input depending on the years involved: https://kb.drakesoftware.com/Site/Browse/10863/1040-Net-Operating-Loss-FAQs

I get my one on one networking here.

And Jesus was a real cowboy - he rode an unbroken colt bareback through a cheering crowd without getting thrown off.

Soooo very glad we have you guys to help us learn. I am feeling more comfortable with the program. I am going to keep practicing and hopefully by filing time I will have built up my speed.

People have differences in how they absorb and retain information, and hopefully we are utilizing those methods that suit each of us best. Most of my CPE now comes from webinars and self-study, and I don't miss the the higher prices, travel, or distractions from other participants for some of the exact same seminars that I take online. This year I purchased an unlimited package that includes both webinars and for self-study, NOT because I need more credits and certainly NOT to buy credits, but because I have access to this company's entire catalog of materials that are excellent reference materials. That's a huge bonus on top of the CPE credits that I EARN and makes the price all the more reasonable.

Every practitioner has his/her preferences for how they obtain their CPE and what they look for in the way of results. I have long ago stopped at going to these for-profit factories of national programs, as they are primarily in business to use registration lists as feeders for other products and services they provide. My preferences at this point are either online webinars sponsored by or associated with professional societies that are geared towards issues effecting a great majority of its members, as well as self-study CPE purchased from certain specific publishers I have great satisfaction from because their references materials are excellent so long as the law remains unchanged. Yes - I do use cpaacademy.com because the courses are free.

You've got a strange idea of adorable, but for an electronic gizmo it is..... let's say "unexceptionable" - that's a nice old-fashioned word for you.

Naveen, the mid-quarter convention could also possibly be the cause. If this is a prior year asset that was already in service and subject to the mid-quarter rule, you can use the drop down or enter "MQ" in the "Force Convention" box:

When I converted earlier this year,I noticed that Drake gives you a lot more method selections than ATX. Several of the choices are a bit confusing, which is where I found my differences.

Concerning the changes pertaining to alimony - The new law will NOT affect those already paying or receiving alimony under existing agreements. The new rules generally apply to divorce and separation agreements executed after December 31, 2018 and prior agreements modified on January 1, 2019 and thereafter IF those modifications expressly state that the new rules apply to those modifications. Below is the actual text from the relevant section of the Act itself:

Alimony is only gone for divorces finalized after Dec. 30, 2017. Any alimony in place before that, remains deductible by the payee, and taxable to the recipient.

We will find out in the next 3 weeks (At Minn, at UCLA, home for Toledo). Idaho is not that good. Fresno tries to schedule a cupcake for the first home game. It got a little out of hand this year. If they score 50+ against Minnesota then we may be able to seriously have a conversation about how good they are. I hope they are this good, but not willing to get excited unless they start the season 4-0. Tom Modesto, CA

Please also note that the entire bottom half of the screen Judy posted gives details for reporting (asset management), dispositions (removal from service, sales, and group sales), and some state-specific fields. You can also - in the top half - access the bonus depreciation elections. Unless there's a pressing need, I elect OUT of bonus depreciation for all my clients. The state doesn't allow it, and keeping one schedule is hard enough for most clients to deal with. Telling them there are two (and then explaining why the numbers are different on the two returns) is more trouble to me than most savings are worth to them. You can choose a specific class, all classes, or a specific asset, to customize depreciation.

Thanks. You confirmed what I thought. ATX for the most part makes the selections for you based on catefory. A drop down menu lets you select class life based on item. For example if it's a computer there is a category for that and when selected will put in the years, method, and convention for you. I will keep practicing and if I run into a problem I will call on you guys for help. It is a learning curve but so far I do like it.

Jack, I am again rushing to your defense. Not that it helps that much. John, in fact ours IS the only way!!

Of course I didn't believe your post was serious. One spoof deserves another. My concern is that the upcoming tax season is going to be somewhat of a gray area with all of the changes. If you post that the "IRS released a statement", then that's maybe not so funny. Better to present yourself as a conduit with a Deep Throat rogue IRS agent who feeds you this information in a dark underground parking garage.

I like my local NY/CT-ATP for networking in my area and the CCH User Conference to meet staff (a biz card with a direct line to a tech support manager is my treasure); both give outstanding courses with nationally-known instructors. But, I don't learn much from preparers out of my area, too many geographical differences. When I find a single topic I like/need, I try to get it as a webinar so as not to waste time traveling for only 1-2 CEs. I read everything I can (all those journals that come with my memberships), take webinars/archived webinars, and local and CCH live courses, a little bit of everything, depending on my needs each year. For example, this year with hip replacement approaching, I'm not traveling to seminars, just the local ones and online.

Yeah, I got that. Trolling isn't nice. Don't forget that crap we all went through a few years ago with that 3115 debacle because of bell ringers. Be nice.

Jack: Get over it. Yours isn't the only way. You don't have anything to prove. Everybody's different.

And you'd be wrong about that. Remember where I went to college. The *eponymous* nerd source!

I'm still very curious as to where you obtained this information. Your post says "The IRS has released questions which will appear on the 8867 by the year 2025". To whom? Where can I find the release? If it isn't public, then where did you get it? I want to see where the IRS has released these questions. I need to see it now as I'm trying to put together a retirement plan. If this is valid, I need to know as this will probably tip the scale in favor or earlier rather than later retirement. It's important that I can verify what you posted now and not in seven years.

And to think, it all started with the IRS subtly converting tax preparers into glorified data entry clerks with the e-flinging carrot & stick. Very clever on their part.

I like to password protect files that contain passwords. Then I just need to remember the password.

Ha, Ha! - I love an unbiased assessment, John. But I suspect we'll all go on with our preferences - Jack with "in person", Max with Sequoia, me with California, and you with online. For outstanding commentary, I herewith suggest your rating be upped from Supreme Guruness to, umm, maybe...Grand Poobah. P.S. Say Catherine, couldn't y'all just "identify as a man" and stand in the short line. I cain't think of anybody who'd object. J

Well I just ordered drake after about 20 years with ATX. There is going to be a learning curve but there are features I really like. I'm doing their practice returns and I was about to pull my hair out when I finally found a detail tab that fixed everything for me. I'm looking forward to giving it a try.

I was never crazy about having an internal modem because the only way to reset it is to reboot your computer. The two newest modems I have just plug into a USB port and they're tiny. They're powered by the USB port too. Isn't that just adorable?

Sneak out 15min before the break is scheduled. Or, in a hotel, there are usually other floors with conference rooms - try those halls (scope out ahead of time).

Hi Jack, Like Edsel, I still like you too. For one, I used to swipe your tax tips off another board years ago. For two, as lots of people know, you're a pretty nice guy even though being a Missourian "show-me" sort. This is not to say Max is mean (he once spoke kindly to me) or wrong about his tough Sequoia stuff (sounds like deep-reading) but I kinda had it figured like you that if it wasn't "live" it wasn't so hot. When I used to go to seminars I couldn't always "spot" a slacker or (like the ex-president) "look into the soul" of a classmate, but a husband and wife team came every year - she pulled out her knitting needles and clickety-clacked away (didn't bother to open her book) for two days while he took notes. That seemed spot-worthy. But (and telling you this is like being sent to the principal's office) I'm "buying" all my hours now by mail from some off-the-wall outfit in California. It's expensive, but it's open-book and as a rep once told me "Nobody's ever flunked these courses!" However, I did once give a scathing review to a receptionist who was rude to me. Anyway, I'm still speakin' even if we're in opposite camps. By the way, I think Edsel's right about the dress code. While I used to get to wear my dapper ties 'n' threads to seminars, now I've reverted to somethin' like -- hmm...there's an old Turner Classic movie wherein the departing colonial bwana of a Malaysian rubber plantation deep in the jungle says to the newly-arrived overseer, "First, you'll stop shaving...... P.S. Max- you can scramble the eggs in a paper bowl & microwave for 100 seconds - not as good/bad as Spanish fried, but it'll do. ____________________________________________ "Far from the madding crowd's ignoble strife." Gray - Elegy in a Country Churchyard

Jack, everyone else is beating up on you - not me!! I believe in personally attending and not selling out to the electronic lemming-like slide into oblivion. I can go to sleep either way - listening to some boring presenter or bleary-eyed listening to a webinar. Most of the people I get to listen to are great and colorful speakers. Very few put me to sleep. Can't agree on live schooled being easier to spot, however. I can imagine what you're saying - those who go to live seminars are bright-eyed, well dressed, lilt in their step, and identify with the beautiful people. Sorry about you folks who listen in on webinars - obviously you slouch around in disheveled clothing, walk around with three days growth of beard, maybe even have athlete's feet or something. Not me and Jack, proud exhibitors of what is best in the world!!

I've personally found the online, webinar or self-study to require more "concentration" than going to a live event. I've gone to many live CPE classes offered by the well known course providers, including CPA Societies. Many of the individuals who attend these live events are either doing personal work or surfing the Internet. At least self-study requires some type of validation, either through a test of some means of substantiating your participation. Anyone who wants to simply "buy" their CPE will do so whether they attend in person or purchase self-study.

It does not matter how decedent used the property. For example in Marx(5 TC 173) court determined a yacht willed from husband to wife was investment property where wife put it up for sale after death of husband and was loss was allowed. The fact that she never used it for personal use proved her profit motive under section 165(c)(2). In another case, Watkins (TC MEMO 1973-167) husband was willed personal residence from wife. The court ruled property was held for investment since heir / husband decided to put it up for sale within a week of wife's death. Therefore he proved his profit motive per section 165(c)(2). It did not matter that the house had been his residence while wife was alive. It also did not matter that he lived in it for a short period of time after it was bequeathed to him. What mattered was that he was able to prove his intent was to sale it and was allowed to deduct loss. So in the case of your client, it appears his thought was "heck I might as well sale this junk and make a little money off of it". There is your profit motive per section 165(c)(2).

Thanks to everyone for the support. My client inherited some land or lot, if you will from his father, on that land or lot is some rusted out worthless equipment that an agreement is being reached with a scrap dealer to remove it at scrap prices minus a removal fee. No, this has never been used by anyone who inherited it for any purpose. The land was not investment property nor was the left over scrap equipment used for anything other than personal use by his father. The scrap equipment was not itemized in the will. Only the lot/land was part of the estate. No values for the scrap equipment had every been established. Please provide references to the case law you mention so I can see if this fits. I do agree with your statement if it was a residence that was never rental property or anything else. If that property was sold, then FMV is basis at date of death Any gains are taxable to the heir(s) Loss is deductible if the property was never converted to personal use by the heirs before they sold it. In my case, I still don't believe a loss is allowed. I think to do so, these items would have to listed as an inheritance and FMV determined. Then maybe. As far as I can tell, the FMV established of the land this junk is on was included the value of the land only. I will still be interested to see the case law and how this maybe determined to be investment type property. On another note, I just received a phone call from a gentleman in the US from the Comcast fraud division that has escalated my case, says I need to do nothing else and that upon completion of the investigation all three CB's will notified to reverse the entries and clear up any damage this may have caused me. He also stated that in his position he could see the notes from the other fraud agents that I had spoken with, listened to the recorded conversations and those employees will be "coached" as they handled it completely wrong. HIs words not mine. However, there was no disagreement or sympathy from me. He was also interested in the fact the credit was granted without proving the identity of the person applying for the credit was actually me when an extended fraud alert was placed on my credit. They will be looking for the employee who was involved in that transaction and correct that problem. Now, do I believe all of this????? I want to so I can rest better but I will remain skeptical. When I get the final results in black and white, my credit restored, and the collection dogs called off, then I will finally rest. I thought it was really bizarre that every time I called the fraud division, they asked if I was a subscriber and if not would I want to be. Are you kidding me???? Burn me, rake me through the coals so I will over jump through every hoop possible to get your services. NOT!!!!! Thanks again to all for listening. You guys are indeed the best!

@Terry D SO sorry to hear of your aggravating troubles! I do hope you can get through to an English-speaking grown-up at non-equitable f-x (see, I'm trying not to be foul-mouthed/typed) before your deadline. YES, there should be retribution from the company causing the problem. And I hope you get some good sleep! I think that at times we take an incident and then start exploring options - like an intellectual puzzle. That doesn't help the original poster, though. I've been on the receiving end of a few of those over the years, myself. Glad that you did get what you needed and I'm not surprised at all that it was from Judy.

If you are a sole proprietor your business assets go into your estate and get a step up basis.

Wow, I'm gonna say this at the risk of offending someone. The responses to this post have gone all around and away from the original question. Judy pretty much summed it up. If this property is personal then no loss. That was the only thing I was looking for. I initially took the wrong road and was not thinking about the character of this so called equipment. I do apologize for that bit of confusion So, I am at the point of saying that the day the scrap dealer picks up the junk or equipment or whatever it is, the price received is FMV because this is indeed personal property and therefore a wash. No gain and no loss. Plain and simple by the code, basis is FMV on inherited personal property at the date of death. I can't believe the trip this post had taken. It turned into various scenarios and ended being compared to logging transactions. I mean really, all of us, and me included should stay with the facts stated in the original or updated post to help the poster. Even if there appears to be missing information or more information needed, it is better to ask for the additional information than to put one's spin on it or making it a contest to prove one's position. I must say some of this was not helpful. Now, shoot me for my opinion. I'm trying my best here. I am not angry at anyone and if I come off that way, I apologize. I have been dealing with my identity being stolen for the 4th time in a year and a half. Dealing with Equifax is like dealing with 3 year old children. I don't think they have anyone located in the US answering the phones. When they do, if you can find a number, they're dumber than a dead rake. Experian, no problem, dispute settlement crap removed from my credit report. Transunion, no problem same as Experian. Equifax, don't ask. All I know is my credit is now frozen everywhere. One week and three days of dealing with idiots on the phone is mentally exhausting. I asked Equifax the magic question. It is MY credit, I cannot access it, get denied every time online. The so called security questions are wrong and bam I'm locked out. But.....the thieves can get it like nothing. I have better luck seeing a friend at the bank to get my credit report from Equifax. They can get it and I can't. Yes, I can get it in fifteen to 20 days. By that time the dispute clock will time out. I mean what the hell? I need to know if I can sue the crap out of Comcast for granting credit in my name when there was a 7 year fraud alert placed on my credit with all three bureaus, with a contact number to verify if the person applying for credit is actually me. No, they never contacted me. Just the collector did when the bill was never paid. I would think this activity would violate some fair credit reporting act or something. Probably another inside job. Here's the best part, Comcast doesn't even offer services where I live in NC. Okay rant over, I'm sorry to bore you all with this so I am going to bed now.