Leaderboard

Yes, hiring people is definitely a trial and error process. Just because someone interviews well doesn't mean they will be a good employee.

Back in May an IRS third-party debt collector contacted me for a debt owed by a former client. Well, I got another letter from them. They ignored the response I'd sent back in May, telling them it wasn't me and not to contact me again. They did have it on record that I'd sent them "something" - but the notation was from about a week ago. So right now we know that this particular company certainly got the contract based on criteria other than competence. You may imagine to your own heart's content what that might be. Finally got through to someone vaguely competent on the phone. This was for a partnership return, and the IRS told me over a year ago that my POA on file was no longer valid because the TMP who signed it had died. However, that same IRS told the debt collectors that my POA was valid, and they are required to contact the POA instead of the deadbeat if there is a POA on file. So I had to dredge up the signed POA and fax that in to Memphis with "WITHDRAWN" on it, and hope that Memphis CAF actually processes that withdrawal instead of discarding it as applying to a POA that is invalid. I swear if these people were competent they'd be dangerous. They sure cause enough trouble with their incompetence. But that's where it stands - I have to get the IRS to withdraw my POA that they told me was invalid but told their debt collectors was active. All of this may hinge on someone at the Memphis CAF Unit having a clue. God help me. Hi. I was away for a week and had a lovely time and came back to this *&^$%$ mess. Welcome home?

Thank you all Like all expected, the old payroll company ignored me, I sent a ticket last week, and no response. But thanks to Judy, I will do the correction as you quoted. I am so glad to find the solution on this. Really appreciated, many many thanks. I will follow up and update here to see how long it will take to get it fixed.

Incidental and basically valueless items such as birthday cards, a cake, and the like, don't count. I tell my clients if the limit is $16,000, not to give more than $15,500 so there is room for a nice birthday or Christmas gift, or sudden repair-the-dishwasher help. And that last $500 could be the Christmas gift.

I don't think it's a scam. However their sales and marketing personnel are very aggressive.

I previewed their their software the second year they were in business before I switched from ATX to Drake and you're right they promise more than they can deliver. I am kinda surprised they are still in business, although this year's user reviews are favorable?

No, according to the OP's initial post that I just reread, the client changed payroll processors sometime during the 1st quarter, so the old processor's filing could not be correct and was instructed not to file it. OP also said she has already handled that part of the problem by calling the IRS, and the IRS finally agreed to ignore the first processor's 941 filing for the (partial) 1st quarter and accepted the 2nd processor's 941 for that quarter. My next post immediately below quotes the IRS instructions of how the W-2 issue should be corrected (not voided), as cbslee pointed out.

When you are working 110 hours a week like jasdim or have a five-month turnaround time like Lion, it is time to hire help! We all get calls from clients wanting to know if their returns are done (even if they dropped off yesterday). In our office we avoid the guilt by having the receptionist who answers the phone ask if we have called them. When they say no, she just tells them we will call with questions or when it is done. This avoids the guilt because we don't get those calls! (To emails, I just respond that they are in queue.) In Lion's case, perhaps you can alert those with particularly complex returns that they will go on extension because their work will take up too much time during season. We do have a group of returns from a family that it crazy complex (corps, s corps, partnerships, multiple trusts), but they always bring their info to us in January. We get them done before things start getting crazy in mid-Feb. We don't always have their individual data in January, but at least the hard part is done early. Can either of you convince some clients to aim for January? I am serious about hiring help. The hard part is getting competent help. We have too many clients and not enough of us who know what we're doing (and just as important, who know what we don't know). We have hired several preparers but have discovered that it takes a few failed tries before landing a good one.

"Ernst & Young employees in the U.S. were upset Tuesday to discover their paycheck deposits from last Friday had been reversed after a glitch at its payroll processing company ADP. In some cases, the problems may have led to overdrafts on some EY U.S. employees’ bank accounts. “Our payroll vendor erroneously reversed EY’s July 15 payroll impacting our US employees and we are urgently working with them to correct the error,” said a spokesperson for the firm in an email to Accounting Today. “Late fees, penalties or other charges they may have incurred as a result of this error will be covered.” ADP confirmed the problem originated in its system. “We can confirm that we experienced an error that caused a payment reversal for a group of U.S. employees of one of our clients,” said a statement from ADP. “We understand the urgency of this issue and our team is working swiftly to resolve this to ensure employees receive their pay as quickly as possible. Later in the day, on Tuesday afternoon, an ADP spokesperson said the problem has been resolved: “As an update, we have resolved the error and have completed processing with our banking partners. All transactions are expected to process by end of business day today. Availability of funds is dependent on each employee's personal banking provider.” The problems affected approximately 55,000 EY employees in the U.S., according to the Financial Times. Late in the day, after the fix was announced, some employees said they were still experiencing problems, while some reported they had been paid double." Well that will remove some of the glitter from ADP's image.

I get asked, really, if it is acceptable to pay in cash. I suggest it is a good idea to be prepared to pay in cash, in case they have no power or have some other issue where checks or other electronic means are not available. While rare, this does happen. Or, to be ready to cut some checks using the prior figures, or give some sort of flat amount, to get employees something for a few days.

Reminds me of the story about when the textile mills used to pay everyone weekly, in cash. One week John opened his envelope, then turned to the paymaster and complained his envelope was $2 short. The paymaster responded, "Yes, last week I overpaid you by $2, so I just deducted it this week." John nodded and walked away. The paymaster then called John back and said, "I could tell by your reaction you knew about the $2 overpayment. Why didn't you mention it last week?" John replied, "Well, I'm a reasonable man. I'm inclined to let it pass if a fellow makes a mistake. But when he messes up two times in a row, it needs to be called to somebody's attention."

The former payroll company should take care of this by voiding the 1st quarter 941 that was filed and by voiding any w-2s it issued in error.

I've been doing some reading and this pdf came up: http://daviswillms.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/ten_things_davis_willms_2018_updated.28475652.pdf Here is the IRS code he links to that I'm getting at 652(a) so you don't actually have a click on it: Subject to subsection (b), the amount of income for the taxable year required to be distributed currently by a trust described in section 651 shall be included in the gross income of the beneficiaries to whom the income is required to be distributed, whether distributed or not. There was a discussion last year that you can only deduct on the 1041 the income actually distributed and that is completely false. Per this attorney on a Simple Trust the 65 days to pay it out isn't applicable as they do not actually have had to pay it out to take the distribution deduction. The 65 day rule only applies to Complex Trusts and Estates. I just found this interesting as I've had attorney's and CPAs argue this isn't true. Several years ago I had an attorney freak out that I was taking a deduction on money he hadn't actually distributed.

I have all my tax returns from when I first got married. I was always going to put the AGIs and tax liab on a spreadsheet -oops -the accounting nerd in me is showing.

The IRS has so many systems that don't talk to each other that I am not surprised. There could have been a data entry error when the paper filed return was entered.

Funny, my client finally went up in their attic and found the W 2 they needed

When I filed my mother's inventory with the state years ago, the attorney told me that she was the only decedent she'd ever encountered who had cash in her possession!

Simplified to a "post card", resulted in a 2 page 1040 now being about 5 pages on average. Gotta agree with @Lion EA

LOL. The IRS might not be going after clients for fraud, but they will most certainly disallow some credits and assess penalties and interest for late payment.

"On May 20 the Houston headquarters of R&D tax credit consulting firm Alliantgroup was raided by the IRS, in the weeks since we’ve had plenty of speculation about the whys and we’ve heard countless accounts from current and former Alliantgroup employees about the “evil, toxic, and emotionally damaging company” that employed them. We’ve now learned that the government is sending subpoenas to CPA firms that referred clients to Alliantgroup and is seeking client tax returns as part of the investigation. Going Concern has reviewed a letter from one CPA firm to clients that received services from Alliantgroup advising these clients that the firm has received a federal grand jury subpoena seeking information relating to Alliantgroup. The government’s demand for information is “broad” and includes tax returns and related information in the firm’s possession for clients who received services from Alliantgroup. The government’s demand references R&D tax credits, cost segregation, and IRC Sec 179D and any related information from January 1, 2011 to present. Clients are assured the firm believes the focus of the grand jury proceedings is strictly related to Alliantgroup, not the clients. The letter states in explicit terms that the firm has no reason to question prior tax credits and/or deductions clients took as a result of their relationship with Alliantgroup at this time. The letter does advise however that clients are welcome to consult with their own attorneys to better understand their rights in this legal matter."

$16,000 per person per year. Not $16,000 at one time and $1,000 later in the year and $500 for her birthday. If OP's client did that, a gift tax return would be required. But OP said his client did NOT want to file a gift tax return. Unless his client has been very generous during his lifetime, he's not likely to owe any gift tax with the return.