Leaderboard

Oh yes, that's been going on for years, and it's probably not Google that is calling. The ones I'm getting now have a spoofed caller i.d. that is supposedly from within the state's area code and may appear from a local exchange as well. https://support.google.com/business/answer/6212928?hl=en

Anybody else have a problem with them? I receive three calls each and every day from them without fail; no matter what. Complaining to supervisors, over-talking salespeople, being on the DO NOT CALL list, cursing, begging for removal, screaming, beating the phone on the desk, nothing helps. You're on their computer list and there's just no way to get off. You'll be dialed again tomorrow morning.

My husband recorded the telephone company's statement "I'm sorry, but the number you have reached is no longer in service. If you feel that you have received this message in error, please hang up and dial" whatever it is. Now, whenever a number calls that he doesn't want to talk to he plays that recording for them, complete with tones, as soon as he answers. I don't know if we are actually getting fewer calls, but he is having a good time and thinks the calls are going down. And I am not going to interfere with his fun.

I like John's suggestion, and Max's. I'd call the RO and leave a message that you will call supervisor TOMORROW if you don't hear - certainly not more time than another day or two. This has gone on long enough. And I'd change John's last line from "worried about protecting client's interest" to "my responsibility is to protect the client's interest" because that is accurate and carries more weight.

When I locked my credit account at Equifax they gave me an 8 digit code to unlock it later. Woops, what they gave me was the first 8 digits of what is actually a 10 digit code.

I think the mom is confusing the settlement and the interest earned on the settlement. Perhaps the settlement itself was not taxable (personal injury or whatever). But the proceeds were put into an interest-bearing account and that interest is taxable. I had a client whose house burned down. He got a large insurance settlement, never rebuilt, and eventually sold the land. Both the insurance and the sales monies went into his brokerage account, which earned lots of income. He had a fit when he learned how much taxes he owed and insisted that "I" was taxing him on his insurance payout. Fortunately his son and broker understood. They now have 90% of his RMD withheld for taxes (which he doesn't notice), so he gets a small refund and loves me again.

There are two suggestions, so far, and both might be worth pursuing. RO's do get sick, get transferred, have accidents, go on leave, retire and some even die. However, I suspect that she has a large case load and is jumping from one case to the other and that me why she talked OIC. That would get you out of her hair. John's approach is what I usually use. In this case, where there have been multiple lapses, I would definitely contact the supervisor. You could also request that a different RO be assigned to your case, but you seem to like her, so maybe you don't want to do that. As for closing down the business, that only happens when taxpayers are continually uncooperative, try to hide money, or keep defaulting on installment agreements. If you don't get any results from the supervisor, then, by all means, call TPAS. Be sure to tell them it is URGENT, otherwise you will wait for weeks to hear back from then.

If he wants to deduct it you should tell him he has to claim as self employed income on his return. SE tax. he will change his mind. But I agree it is not deductible to his parents and I think it taxable to him. he is providing a service.

Agree!!!

The IRS will say that this is compensation and needs to be reported, even if you try to call it a gift.

Well, they may not be but they say they are Google. And yes, last year they began using our area code and then progressed to our local prefix. I tried the reasonable approach recently and listened to their entire spiel, starting off emphasizing I was not interested in buying anything. They assured me all was well and there would be no charges whatever. Five minutes later, they tried to end the call by notifying me I would be invoiced $170 for something. After a good cursing to his supervisor they hung up. I've tried blocking the numbers but you might as well try to count the stars by comparison - each time I do that they simply change or add a digit and it's all new. Their computer is smarter than my computer.

He basically pays all bills and oversees his parent's properties as well as having the power to sell assets. I doubt he is reporting any of it as he is unemployed. It could be looked on as a parental gift and like Roberts I see it as nondeductible legal fees.

Given the circumstances, I don't think you have any choice but to contact the supervisor. Maybe start with a diplomatic message on the RO's voice mail that you will need to do this if she doesn't get back to you within X days. Your message could point out that you hope the RO is OK with respect to health, work load, or whatever, and the last thing you want to do is potentially create any problems for the RO internally, but you're worried about protecting your client's interests. I'll be interested in hearing what others advise to do in this situation.

Also the scary part of this is you have no time to finish this by 09/17/18 ( or at least I wouldn't), so late penalty will be 195. per month. BUT if they have never been late before then I always been lucky getting a penalty waived. You can back into the balance sheet but the books would have to be clean and it doesn't seem like that is the case. Good luck.

I believe that even if I thought @RitaB was not correct I would not point it out to her. I saw all the flowers from the fertile ground in her back 40 for myself. But I really think she is correct as well. Tom Modesto, CA

I believe if the rent charged is a flat rate regardless of sales by the tenant, Sch E is correct. Use Form 4835 if the landowner's rent depends on production by the tenant. See p. 2: https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f4835.pdf

Fortunately, I don't get too many. One was from a very persistent solar panel company, that kept calling on the home land line, even after it was blocked. So, I answered and played along with the caller and dragged the call out. Finally, I said I didn't own the house (lie). The guy hung up and that was the last call I ever got from them.

I get calls from "invalid number" and "unavailable" --several every day. Sometimes I pick up the phone and press "talk" then hang up. That stops the phone from ringing.

Nice change, Catherine. I agree 100% that's a much better way to state that fact.

I set the phone down on my desk, but not on speaker. When I hear them say Press 1 for..., I press and let phone stay on my desk. Eventually it squawks at me that the human hung up. I kept that line from calling someone else for a few minutes. It doesn't bother me much, not being on speaker. I irritate a human. And, I think that some of those irritated humans actually drop my number from the lists. Sometimes.

For these folks, I would NOT recommend "filing *something*" just to get it done by 9/17 with the intent to amend later. Once the pressure (of monthly penalties) is off, you won't see them again until 9/1/2019.

I'd call it a gift from the parents. "Here, son, we're taking a lot of your time and want to thank you."

From the 16th Amendment (that legalized income taxation): "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived....." If it's income, it is subject to taxation, unless specifically exempted. Your return question should be why she thinks it is exempt. Yes, it might be interest on a settlement. Yes, the settlement might be exempt - but NOT what it earns. Get her to tell you what she thinks and you'll know how to debunk her error.

My husband ran into the *same* thing. Somehow I got all the digits.

Yup. I detest those with a deep and immovable loathing. Three a day? There have been days when I'll get six or seven. Sometimes the house and the office phones ring within seconds of each other. The only thing that slowed them down (and it might have been serendipity) was waiting until a human came on the line and making gorilla noises into the phone until THEY hung up. I did enjoy that - but generally it takes too long to wait through their stupid spiel and get put through to a human.

Funny how we can be blinded by our assumptions at times. A 4-member S-Corp bought out one of the minority-interest shareholders this year. Payment was made by the corp directly to the shareholder, and the purchase price exceeded the par value of the shares. I had never encountered this situation (the S-Corp making the purchase vs other shareholders making the purchase) and so had been assuming all along that treasury stock would create a second class of shareholder. This had been rolling around in my mind for some time, so I decided that today was the day to research it (with the intention of asking a question here if my findings were unclear.) Turns out that it's just a matter of recognizing the treasury stock in the equity section with a PIC entry for the excess over par. No different than accounting for the identical transaction in a C-corp. So this isn't a question - it's a comment. It's amazing what we can learn when we actually do the research instead of depending upon what we assume we know about a situation that may be new to us. Lesson learned (or re-learned).

Sometimes my problem is that I learned something so thoroughly years ago, and I was unaware (or forgot!) that it changed. Always a good idea to check to make sure what you KNOW is actually correct.

Sometimes we don't have to look and further than our own backyard. See the last 2 responses in this topic here on this forum:

Yardley, it IS taxable and is the child's, subject to the kiddie tax. I had this exact scenario years ago at the firm I worked for. Four minor children each received a huge settlement from a small plane mfr after it was found negligent in the deaths of both parents. The god parents had taken them in and adopted them as their own before ever knowing if any settlement would occur.

Thank you, All. The mother shared, the son is naturally born and received funds from an insurance company due to an accident settlement. The funds remain in this "surrogate" account until he is 18. My initial reaction was...It's taxable and I still feel that way. I appreciate everyone's input and thoughts. It's great to have this forum to turn to.

Whoa! when I Googled "surrogate" all I got were links to surrogate mothers. It must be a hot topic. If it is the mother's natural child, it would be a Custodial acct. (Thanks, Judy). If the mother was appointed guardian of a someone elses child, and the mother was legally appointed guardian, it would usually be a guardian account. However, it seems that in some states, they use "Surrogate" for both custodial and guardian accounts. Maybe PA is one of them. It may be that the child is adopted and the account was opened between the time the mother was appointed guardian and before any adoption was finalized. Yardley, I would simply tell the mother that it does not matter what the account is called, it is the SSN on the account is all that matters and any interest over $0.50 has to be reported.

I have learned over the years, and especially nowadays, NEVER assume anything. It is sometimes hard to do because every once in a while you slip up.

They can not be legal fees. because he is not an attorney-at-law. A POA makes someone an Attorney-in-Fact. The payments can be for management fees, consulting fees and fees for other services performed. One possible way to avoid the SE tax would be for the parents set up some sort of trust with the son as trustee. Since he is not a professional trustee, the payments to the son would would be ordinary income, Line 21.

Or you could contact taxpayer advocate services.

JKL...that's what I'm trying to determine. Not sure why she feels the "surrogate" impacts the taxability of the earnings. I asked her for additional info. I don't think that will make a difference but I would like to know more about the situation.

Ok, parent is a guardian for these funds of the minor child. The child is the legal owner of the assets with guardian having a fiduciary responsibility. Taxable earnings would be the child's. Why does the parent think the earnings wouldn't be, or wouldn't be taxable? Good info here on different types of accounts: https://info.legalzoom.com/difference-between-guardian-account-custodial-account-23481.html

Thank you, Both. The 1099-INT is in the Childs SSN. Mother is listed under the child's name with GDN after her name. I assume that means "Guardian?" In any event, I've asked the mother for additional information on the specifics of the "surrogate account." I prepared the returns assuming all the children's income was taxable. The mother is questioning whether the surrogate account interest is taxable.

I've never heard the term either and found only the one answer shown below from within a Yahoo Q&A when searching for that term related to bank accounts. From that, I'd report the income as belonging to the person whose SSN is on the 1099.

Cash isn't a problem. Gross was over $180K. As for the auditor accepting the deduction and opening a new audit, the IRS doesn't work that way. The auditor only has so much leeway. Everything has to pass by the supervisor. Audits are not initiated by the auditors. Besides, the 1099's ranged between $3 -$5K, hardly worth auditing. There were other issues that the client came out favorably on.

I believe that Rita is correct.

And yes - he ended up taking 100%.

Thanks, @Catherine and @Abby Normal! I was having nightmares about it last night. Their mom does the books on Quickbooks online. I don't think any of the accounts were reconciled from the day they started. I just spoke to her and requested access. Company's initial filing was 2011. I'm also not sure if they've ever filed a sales tax return. It's an e-commerce business. I'm afraid to ask.

Tell them you need everything entered in QuickBooks with bank statements reconciled from the beginning... or they can go somewhere else. And that you'd be happy to enter it all for them a $5,000 retainer. How can a company with mid 6 figure sales not have any books! The IRS would slaughter them on an audit.

haha, you know that's not true! You and some other exceptional members have corrected me when I'm wr...wr...wr... wrong (there I said it ), and I may not say it openly , but I do appreciate that you make sure the topic is explored fully and that we all end up with the correct answer. Don't I at least give those corrective posts a like? Believe it or not, I am still human and make mistakes.

According to this news article, one year later, no sanctions or enforcements of any kind have been taken against Equifax. Business as usual - more sheep to be fleeced ! https://apnews.com/3e135a3f5b1941a48a9cb9692950d11e/A-year-after-Equifax-breach,-no-enforcement-actions