Leaderboard

I got a reply from ATX regarding this issue. In case this comes up for anyone in the future. ATX resolution: Additional Note: Not only did the Line 3 instructions throw me off as ATX reports in the resolution, but it was the ABOVE 2 questions being NO, and the highlighted above stmt that said "If you answered YES to Questions 1 AND Question 2, continue below, entering ONLY the information pertaining to the taxpayer born on or before 07/01/1957." Personally, I don't think interpretation of the worksheet instructions are the problem, I think ATX instructions are just flat wrong. Had I followed them, the client would have owed $4500 more in RI taxes. ATX gets alot right federally and catches things I've missed time to time, but on a state taxation level, I find I have to be much more digilent about the return's accuracy on specialty items.

I agree with Bulldog Tom in that your work may also be an inaccurate recreation using only the bank statements if what was retrieved from the prior accountant and client was incomplete data. By using only the bank statements, then it seems you are recreating using cash basis. Is that the basis used for the prior 990s and financials? If the NP used accrual basis, that would be a possible explanation why the revenue and expenses could be higher than your recreations. Are the 990s and financials presented on the same basis of accounting? I generally don't amend a predecessors work without knowing I have all of the data. To do so from incomplete data, there is no way to know that your work is any more accurate than what you are amending from.

A lot of estates don't go through attorneys or Probate. A personal representative, usually a family member, takes responsibility for tax filings and signs the returns as such. I don't demand documentation to deal with them if I already know them. If there is a refund and an administrator will be appointed, you do need the court appointment to file the 1310 but not to just deal with the person filing the taxes.

For me, those add on items are what keeps me participating. The direct answers, one can find via google-fu, and likely get close via AI search. The human experience and anecdotes are the things of value - to me - in a group, and will often help me see a bigger picture, or a different solution. Sort of like the thread about the non profit with accounting troubles where I could share my multiple experiences with letting the old entity die and not drag down the future. It happens every day in for profit (UI dumping, changing to a new entity to let debt die, etc.) and it can work in other sectors too. Was not really a direct answer to the OP's question, but if workable for their situation, could be a wise move (and maybe the move which benefits the entity the most). Or to ramble on, the same way where any corp officer/director which did not take COVID relief, and does not seek all things to benefit the corp, was derelict in fiduciary duty, and should have been terminated.

You said yourself that you are working with incomplete information. That leads me to believe that the bank statements are not the only source documents (I could be wrong, just my hunch). I would hesitate to amend returns that I am not sure I have all the data and documentation for. How would you defend it if the IRS decided to audit the returns? What I would do, if you want to keep the client, is ask the client to give you a letter indicating that I can rely on the work of the prior accountant. Get the prior year financials and returns, make your prior year financials look like the reported financials and returns and move forward with your work in the current and future years. I hate these situations, but I caution you about making it worse unless you are absolutely certain you have all the source documents to make any changes. Tom Longview, TX