Leaderboard

You make a great point. Everybody has a different way of processing a return. One is not necessarily better than another, just different. I came to ATX after 5 seasons with Proseries, so I was very familiar with the data sheet method. I liked Proseries, and I would have stayed, but I just could not stomach the price. The learning curve from Proseries to ATX was very short. It took me 2 seasons to get good at using Proseries (I did not have a lot of clients, so I had plenty of time to work with the software). It took about 10 returns to get used to ATX. The thing that I learned when first starting tax prep work was to review the final return and make sure you had everything in the right place. You had to know what the expected outcome of the return was, and then double check your input against the source documents. I can do that with ATX on the screen, and make corrections so much more quickly in ATX than I ever could in Proseries. When in Proseries I had to work from what was essentially a PDF on the screen, then go out, go to the data sheet, make the change, go back to the print preview, check it again, etc. I find the ATX interaction much faster for the way I prepare and review. It is a personal choice. Tom Newark, CA

Nope - hasn't happened to me for a very long time. We do not quote prices on the phone anymore other than, "our minimum fee for the most basic simplest of tax returns is $200. It goes up from there based on a number of things like complexity and how many papers we have to look at. We will be happy to quote you a more firm price for our services after we have seen your information. Please drop it off at your convenience and we will call you with a price before we begin work." I can do that because I am no longer actively looking for work. I have enough to keep me busy for some time to come. Most new work we get now comes from referral and those folks never ask about price because the referring person has already told them about our fees. Had a referral walk in yesterday. It seems his previous preparer has retired. His comment when he dropped off his stuff was, "she (the previous accountant) used to spread all of my stuff out on the table and she would do the return while I waited." Sorry - that is not how we fly. Leave your stuff and we will do your return when we get to it. Oh, and by the way, your return will be extended. Oh, and by the way, don't expect to hear from us before July. I think it is always a good idea to abuse the client right from the get go, He left his stuff. We will see him again in July.

Greatest thing I ever heard. Not even kidding. Lordy, I am taking a class from you in August. Not July, cause you're obligated to that referral who left there going, "I did this to myself. I must have secretly wanted it. I mean, just look how I'm dressed..."

I had a client that I finally fired a few years back that just about everything he said started out with "no offense......" It was just a habit with him but got so down right annoying listening to it. Glad he is gone.

And, "Honey, I'm not trying to tell you what to do, but"

Another thing I find: When people emphasize "simple"...they are complex When people tell you how crazy and complex their situation is...it may mean they had a stock sale.

I was just about to tell you tea and lemon and honey and whiskey. Take a long nap.

I hate having a cold so you have my complete sympathies! Put some whiskey in that tea!

Hugs to you. I really hate days like that. Feel better.

My reply to ATX: Yes, I do definitely believe that you are incorrect. Take a look at the instructions for Lines 2a and 2b. It even says if one or both of the figures are negative, add them and if you have a negative result, enter -0- on Line 3 of Form 8962 and continue with the form. If what you are asserting is correct, the form would state "if the total of Line 2a and 2b is a negative number, stop, you do not qualify for the credit. Also, from your reply, it appears as you are ignoring the instructions for Line 6. The tab it refers to '"Pt1 - HI FPL" is all about INCOME THAT IS BELOW 100% OF THE POVERTY LEVEL. Thanks so much and I would greatly appreciate your forwarding the issue to another team. In theory, I agree with your conclusion, however, I must complete the form per IRS rules and regulations and the Final Federal regulations dealing with the law itself. . I'm at my desk and will be for a long, long, long time today if someone wishes to call me. Sincerely, Cathy Dauthier

I have found that it is best to quote a minimum for a basic return - 1040, state and Sch A. Anything more than that will have fees based on any additional forms and number of entries and in some cases additional time involved. That way the potential client doesn't get to define "basic return", I do. It seems to work.

And what's wrong with a little challenge about now? Doesn't this stuff just keep us on our toes - and out of our minds!!! Far less troubling, but nonetheless irritating - second year client sent me W-2 10 days ago before vacation. Yesterday sent 5 separate emails each with screen shots of power bills, mortgage statements, cell phone bills, county real estate page. I'm supposed to add up this stuff. When I reminded her that I bill by the hour she responded that she would try to get an H&R appointment. Geez, does she think they will be happy to look at screen shots of bills for data entry? She sent added figures this morning. I'm grouchier than I have ever been and I honestly don't think it's all me. Well, maybe....

I have elderly clients coming in later today who are upset that they owe 50K on 1.1 million sale of principal residence they bought in 1992. I'm going to tell them to be glad the laws benefit them because if they didn't they would 400K. And to be glad they made so damn much money!

Go home....eat some chicken soup...and go to sleep on your napping sofa. Feel better soon.........

I had a client get theirs done for free and then she wanted to stop in here and have me double check that it was right. For free.

Yes, you get what you pay for!

You also mail a signed 3115 to either Odgen or DC, I think. Instructions should give you mailing info.

It goes right along with 'I know you're busy, but . . .'

I had a client who had an opportunity to do "better than free" this year. I was prepared to PAY him to go somewhere else. Too bad he didn't know that before telling me he was changing.

Do you ever get the client that call on the phone for a price, and you ask what tax documents they have. And they so oh all I have is SS and a pension and property taxes and mortgage interest. So you give them a price based on that. Then when they come in the basket full of stuff. They have 5 1099MISC with the amount in box 7. Oh I'm a musician on the side. I purchased all this equipment...amps.... I have travel expenses and advertising.... The 1099R oh about 5 of them also. I was so B/Oed.

Going home now; thanks for all the good wishes and advice. We have a facial steamer that I bought years and years ago when my girls were little and tended to get croup. IT works *great* for colds and sinus infections. And Judy; most of my clients DO have a flagged field just for that reason; I don't know why these folks didn't. *Everything* about them is contrary and backwards - including this glitch. Sigh.

I like to check my numbers as I go. From the old paper and pencil days; I know where a number is supposed to go when I enter it on a form. I generally check to see if it went there as I go; such as, did putting in the retirement savings cause the savers credit to populate. I have always been happy with ATX and form entry and depend on the jump to arrows because I know where I am supposed to jump too. I agree that the most important part of creating a return is checking the numbers and location of the numbers on the printed return before filing. BTW: I had my first identity theft return for the year last night. Hope and pray that it will be the last.

I had the worst sinus infection ever about 2 weeks ago, and I am still sitting here clearing my throat every 2 minutes. It doesn't go away fast this year. I was having a bout with migranes and vertigo a few years ago and bought myself a recliner for my office. And there have been many an afternoon i have had to kick my dog out of it so i could get in it. It's hidden around the corner, so most people never see it. It was the best investment i made here. Hope you're feeling better soon! Get some antibiotics going.

Catherine, you should change your method of selecting the e-files so that it is a multi-step process. I have my Drake set so that it requires me to use the EF screen to mark them as ready, and then I have to go out to the client manager and create the e-file transmission file from the EF drop down menu. The other thing you could do very simply is to flag a field on the demographics input that will definitely stop the processing. I use an override for the fee that I'm billing on that screen, and Drake remembers that from the prior year so that field rolls over as flagged from the start, and I leave it that way until I'm ready to file. It's easy to remember and find. I hope you feel better. I've been fighting off the remnants of a cold from a couple of weeks ago. Husband told me last night that his shop has that nasty stomach bug circulating around. Two guys have been out sick on different days with it, and he was called in yesterday to fill in for one of them. I hope he doesn't bring that home within the next week!

Yes, I think it actually happens more often than not. OK, maybe I'm exaggerating. No. No, I'm not.

Yes...I know the feeling. When I quote a price....I add..."This is based on no surprises."

That is probably my biggest fear (well, second to putting in the wrong bank information (like mine instead of theirs), so I check and double check and triple check (and do not go near the mouse) before I am ready to click send. We will write this glitch off to your drugs. I am sorry you are down and out. Listen to the others - take care of yourself first or you will be no good to anyone later. Enjoy your nap!

"No offense, but they ask me at work why I pay you to do my taxes when I could get VITA to do them for free." Ever notice that saying, "No offense, but," before you say something offensive is exactly zero percent effective at dissuading offense? And, no VITA would not do your return for free or otherwise. Trust me. But I told her, "If you can get these returns done for free, that's what you should do, have at it."

IRA Rollover Limit May Lead to Tax Penalties for Clients April 2, 2015 By Seymour Goldberg (Page 1 of 2) Practitioners need to be aware of the tax-free IRA rollover rules that took effect on Jan. 1, 2015 to protect their clients from major tax problems and penalties. For many years the IRS indicated in Publication 590 that if you have multiple IRAs, it was permissible to do multiple IRA rollovers. The old rules, as described in Publication 590, stated, “Generally, if you make a tax-free rollover of any part of a distribution from a traditional IRA, you cannot, within a 1-year period, make a tax-free rollover of any later distribution from that same IRA. You also cannot make a tax-free rollover of any amount distributed, within the same 1-year period, from the IRA into which you made the tax-free rollover. The 1-year period begins on the date you receive the IRA distribution, not on the date you roll it over into an IRA.” The IRS gave an example. “You have two traditional IRAs, IRA-1 and IRA-2. You make a tax-free rollover of a distribution from IRA-1 into a new traditional IRA (IRA-3). You cannot, within one year of the distribution from IRA-1, make a tax-free rollover of any distribution from either IRA-1 or IRA-3 into another traditional IRA. However, the rollover from IRA-1 into IRA-3 does not prevent you from making a tax-free rollover from IRA-2 into any other traditional IRA. This is because you have not, within the last year, rolled over tax-free, any distribution from IRA-2 or made a tax-free rollover into IRA-2.” Based on IRS Publication 590, taxpayers could have multiple IRA rollovers during a one-year period since the one-year limitation rule was applied on an IRA by IRA basis. In essence, each IRA maintained by an IRA owner would have a separate one-year period. The old rules were widely known by practitioners, financial institutions and consumers. They could be used as an income tax-planning technique to provide a tax-free, penalty-free loan to a taxpayer if the taxpayer had a number of separate IRAs. Those old rules were used by many until the Tax Court spoke in Bobrow v. Commissioner in 2014. In the Bobrow case, the Tax Court held that the one-year limitation rule under Internal Revenue Code Section 408(d)(3)( applied on an aggregate basis and not on an IRA-by-IRA basis. The New Rules The IRS explained in Publication 590-A how the IRA rollover rules will now work, starting this year. “Beginning in 2015, you can make only one rollover from an IRA to another (or the same) IRA in any 1-year period regardless of the number of IRAs you own. The limit will apply by aggregating all of an individual’s IRAs, including SEP and SIMPLE IRAs as well as traditional and Roth IRAs, effectively treating them as one IRA for purposes of the limit. However, trustee-trustee transfers between IRAs are not limited and rollovers from traditional IRAs to Roth IRAs (conversions) are not limited. In the new publication, the IRS provided a fresh example, with a taxpayer named John, who has three traditional IRAs; IRA-1, IRA-2, and IRA-3. “On January 1, 2015, John took a distribution from IRA-1 and rolled it over into IRA-2 on the same day. For 2015, John cannot roll over any other 2015 IRA distribution, including a rollover distribution involving IRA-3. This would not apply to a conversion.” The IRS has issued two announcements involving the application of the one-rollover-per-year limitation in IRA rollovers: Announcement 2014-15 and 2014-32. The IRS decided that it was best to have the new rules for administrative purposes become effective as of Jan. 1, 2015 and not applied on a retroactive basis. IRS Announcement 2014-32 was fairly comprehensive and made the following points: 1. Amounts received from an IRA will not be included in the gross income of a distributee to the extent that the amount is paid into an IRA for the benefit of the distributee under the 60-day rollover rule. (Note that Publication 590-B indicates that certain distributions are not eligible for rollover. For example, amounts that must be distributed (required minimum distributions) during a particular year are not eligible for rollover treatment.) 2. The Internal Revenue Code at Section 408(d)(3)( is the key section involved under the one-rollover-per-year limit on IRA rollovers. 3. The IRS announcement stated that an individual receiving an IRA distribution on or after Jan. 1, 2015 cannot roll over any portion of the distribution into an IRA if the individual has received a distribution from any IRA in the preceding one-year period that was rolled over into an IRA, but subject to transitional rules for certain prior transactions. 4. The IRS, in Publication 590 and its proposed regulations, had previously provided that the IRA rollover rules were based on an IRA-by-IRA basis. However, in Bobrow v. Commissioner, the Tax Court held that the one-rollover-per-year limit applied on an aggregate basis and not on an IRA by IRA basis. 5. The IRS will apply the Bobrow interpretation of the law under Section 408(d)(3)( for distributions occurring on or after Jan. 1, 2015. 6. A rollover from a traditional IRA to a Roth IRA (a conversion) is exempt from the one-rollover-per-year rule. It is not considered in applying the one-rollover-per-year rule to other rollovers. 7. A rollover from a Roth IRA to any Roth IRA (including the same Roth IRA) would preclude any other Roth IRA rollovers to any Roth IRA under the one-year rule. It would also preclude any rollovers from one traditional IRA to a traditional IRA (including the same traditional IRA) under the one-year rule. 8. A rollover from a traditional IRA to any traditional IRA (including the same traditional IRA) would preclude any other traditional IRA rollovers under the one-year rule. It would also preclude any rollover from any Roth IRA to a Roth IRA (including the same Roth IRA) under the one-year rule. 9. According to the IRS, for purposes of Announcement 2014-32 the term “traditional IRA” includes a simplified employee pension under IRC Section 408(k) and a Simple IRA under IRC Section 408(p). 10. The IRS indicated that the one-rollover-per-year limitation does not apply to a rollover to an IRA from a qualified plan. In addition, the IRS also indicated that the one-rollover-per-year limitation does not apply to rollover to a qualified plan from an IRA. 11. The one-rollover-per-year limitation rule does not apply to trustee-to-trustee transfers. IRA Rollover Headaches A violation of the one-rollover-per-year-limit on IRA rollover will lead to headaches. Not only may the violation of the rollover limitation rule trigger taxable events (income taxes and possible accuracy penalties and early distribution penalties), but it may in many instances be treated as an excess contribution that was made to the receiving IRA as well. An excess contribution to an IRA is subject to a 6 percent penalty tax that is ongoing on the excess amount that it remains in the IRA at the end of each year. A special correction rule, however, applies to the first year that an excess contribution is made. The IRS issued information release IR-2014-107 on Nov. 10, 2014. The release states in part the following: “Although an eligible IRA distribution received on or after January 1, 2015 and properly rolled over to another IRA will still get tax-free treatment, subsequent distributions from any of the individual’s IRAs (including traditional and Roth IRAs) received within one year after that distribution will not get tax-free rollover treatment.” According to IRC Section 408(d)(3)( the tax-free rollover rules do not apply to any amount “received by an individual from an individual retirement account or individual retirement annuity if at any time during the 1-year period ending on the day of such receipt such individual received any other amount . . . from an individual retirement account or an individual retirement annuity which was not includible in gross income.” Spousal IRA Rollovers Based on the above legal analysis, spousal IRA rollovers would fall with the one-per-year limit on IRA rollovers. The Tax Court opinion and the law clearly indicates that any amount received by an individual from an individual retirement account or individual retirement annuity (regarding tax-free rollovers) is subject to the one-per-year limit on IRA rollovers. Obviously, the law does not distinguish between a spousal rollover from a decedent’s IRA and a rollover from the spouse’s own IRA. The law is inclusive and covers any IRA distribution received by an individual under the one-per-year limit on IRA rollovers. One cannot argue that a spouse is not an individual with respect to a spousal IRA rollover. Further, it cannot be successfully argued that upon the death of an IRA owner survived by a spouse beneficiary that the spouse is not the legal owner of the decedent’s IRA as a matter of law. Of course, the spouse beneficiary of the decedent’s IRA is the legal owner of the decedent’s IRA as of the date of death of deceased IRA owner. The surviving spouse is the beneficiary of a non-probate asset and as such owns the deceased IRA owner’s account. This legal position is consistent with Revenue Procedure 89-52, in which the IRS clearly indicates, in the context of an inherited IRA that is payable to nonspouse beneficiaries, that each beneficiary will own a 50 percent share of the IRA. Once an IRA owner dies survived by a spouse beneficiary, then the deceased IRA owner’s account is maintained for the benefit of the surviving spouse within the purview of Section 408(d)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. If this were not the case, the spousal rollover of IRA would not be valid under the Internal Revenue Code. As previously discussed, on the death of IRA owner survived by a surviving spouse, the owner of the deceased IRA owner’s account is then the surviving spouse. At that time, the deceased IRA owner’s account is then maintained for the surviving spouse and should be subject to the one-per-year limit on IRA rollovers. Based on the above analysis, the following are examples of issues that a surviving spouse should be aware of: A Comprehensive Example John is an IRA owner who dies at age 68 on May 1, 2015 survived by his spouse Mary. His spouse Mary is age 65 in 2015 and has her own IRA. She is also the beneficiary of John’s IRA. Assume that Mary receives an IRA distribution of $100,000 from her own IRA on Feb. 1, 2015 and rolls it over to another IRA in her name on March 1, 2015. In addition, on June 15, 2015 she receives a distribution from John’s deceased IRA of $200,000 and rolls it over to her own IRA on July 1, 2015. Question 1: Has Mary violated the one-per-year limit on IRA rollovers? Answer: Yes. Since Mary received a distribution of $200,000 from John’s deceased IRA account on June 15, 2015, she is in violation of the one-per-year limit on IRA rollovers. The reason is that under the one-per-year limit in IRA rollovers, Mary could not rollover tax-free any IRA distribution she receives during the one-year measuring period rule under the Internal Revenue Code. Since Mary received IRA distribution from her own IRA on Feb. 1, 2015, then under the aggregation rule, she would have to wait until at least Feb. 1, 2016 in order to take another IRA distribution that would be eligible for tax-free rollover treatment. Question 2: Assume the facts in Question 1. What are the tax consequences that are triggered as a result of the $200,000 rollover by Mary on July 1, 2015? Answer: According to the IRS and the law, Mary would have to report the $200,000 amount in income for calendar year 2015. In addition, she would be subject to an excess contribution tax penalty of 6 percent unless corrected in the manner required by the IRS. Question 3: How can the taxable event described in the answer to question 2 be avoided? Answer: Mary should arrange for John’s deceased IRA to be directly transferred from John’s deceased IRA account to Mary’s IRA. Although the Bobrow case covers traditional IRAs, the language in Bobrow and in the Internal Revenue Code is broad enough to include all IRAs, including a decedent’s IRA that is payable to a surviving spouse. Seymour Goldberg, CPA, MBA, JD, is a senior partner in the law firm of Goldberg & Goldberg, P.C., in Long Island, N.Y., and professor emeritus of law and taxation at Long Island University. He has taught many CLE and CPE programs at the state and national level as well as CLE courses for the New York State Bar Association, City Bar Center for Continuing Legal Education, New Jersey Institute for Continuing Legal Education, local bar associations and law schools. He is a member of the IRS Long Island Tax Practitioner Liaison Committee and the Northeast Pension Liaison Group. He was formerly associated with the Internal Revenue Service and has been involved in conducting continuing education outreach programs with the IRS. He has authored guides for the American Bar Association and the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and other organizations. Mr. Goldberg wrote an amicus (friend of the court) brief in the inherited IRA Supreme Court case, Clark v. Rameker. His latest book, entitled “The IRA Distribution Rules: IRS Compliance and Audit Issues 2014 Edition,” was published by the AICPA and is available in the AICPA bookstore.

Philip...that's good to know. I have a few PPR business returns I purchase each year so I'll probably move to Max. Appreciate you posting that.

You can't lump those sales of ABC that have different sale dates during the year. You can lump those sales of ABC that are short-term and sold on the same date that were purchased at different times by entering "various" as the purchase date. Then you can also lump all the long-term and sold on the same date that were purchased at different times by entering "various" as the purchase date.

Everything that comes before "but" is BS. Those VITA preparers get some training in vary basic returns and anything more complicated they are supposed to tell the client to go to a professional. I have an EA friend that retired a few years ago but does VITA returns. He told me that one of the VITA preparers did a return incorrectly and the client ended up paying P&I along with the taxes. The client wanted VITA to pay for the P&I and guess what? They told them it was a free return and there was no recourse. So much for FREE.

Well, bless their hearts. Most of the clients don't have a clue.

I want a HuG!...

I hate those!

A lot of people were paying for useless health care plans before and having to file for bankruptcy even though they were 'insured.' Health insurance companies need to go back to being nonprofit like they were in the 70s. No reason to have shareholders earning dividends off our struggle to be insured.

WHAT YOU CAN DO is to use the override option to type into the sig line [use all caps] EFILED, DO NOT MAIL That is simple to do, costs nothing but a few seconds.

Just got off the phone with my rep at ATX. According to her, the current renewal prices that are being quoted are the lowest prices of the year as they include the 10% discount. The price will not go lower and there will actually be a price increase in December. I recognize some have indicated that they were able to negotiate better pricing than what was quoted and that may continue to be the case. I'm simply relaying what I was told. In addition, PPR pricing will increase to $54 from the current $25 for personal and $35 for business returns. I'm leaning toward renewing with Max from my current 1040 Office Package.

He sounds like the guy I'm meeting with tomorrow, although mine does know that when he sells something big he will pay in something like an estimate. He uses the estimate vouchers like deposit slips and pays them at odd dates or adds several together. Last year I gave him the extension for his federal return with explicit instructions, and he sent that in on May 8th because he didn't have the funds on 4/15. Then he tried to say I didn't tell him. I'm supposed to meet with him tomorrow to deliver his personal returns and returns for 2 LLCs, and the adult son's returns too. I received an email this morning from their attorney's assistant that the 2 of them decided to gift the dad's ownership in a third LLC that dad and son own together over entirely to the son. Gifts dtd 12/31 splitting part of dad's ownership to the mom and then further breaking the gift down to be on 12/31 and 1/1/15. They just decided this 2 weeks ago and no one ever mentioned this.

Sorry to hear that, I hope you feel better soon. My couch is in my office.... Rich

KC...thanks for posting this.

they have to meet the two out of five years rule (own and live in it) so if they have been gone since 2010, they are past that... unless active duty military for which the two out of five can be suspended for up to ten years still even if they did meet the two out of five, they cannot exclude the part of the gain based on the depreciation taken in many cases, the gain is not more than the depreciation that has to be recaptured and thus there is nothing to exclude and then also have to consider if there is any gain allocated to "non-qualified use" that cannot be excluded

I can state unequivocally a lot of interesting critters are raised on farms in Virginia. And, I did not realize Rita (who looks vaguely familiar) and Gail who looks as if she might be a cuz are from Virginia.

You're a good husband for a primate.

I have them bring me something: school records, daycare records, doctor bill and I keep a copy for my records.

I have 58 that I am committed to getting done and another 5 or 6 I would like to get done by the end of the day Sunday. Took yesterday completely off and away from the computer. Feel re-energized. Had a wonderful mini-vaca. Ready to run for the roses. Like most of you, yesterday was my first day off in over 12 weeks. An interesting note is developing about this season. I purposely worked 85 hours per week this season instead of the 105 that I had become accustomed to in years gone by. And my revenue is up. Go figure. So next year I am only going to work 40 hours per week and see if that pattern continues to hold true.

I always complain about Easter being in the middle of tax season, but sometimes it's exactly what we need. A day off, some good food, and family that we love. Now - here we go. 9 more days!!

Two things that I learned is that: 1, ACA is only beneficial to the people who make a lot of money (they have insurance anyways) or the people that makes little money, they will get cheap or free insurance. 2. Besides EIC, ACA will motive people to under report income.

These situations are more symptoms of the nationwide debilitating disease known as Intentional Apathetic Ignorance. It is highly contagious, and completely addictive.

If we are going to be stuck with this law, at least they could use the prior year income, and then allow for changes if there is a "life event". They already have a mechanism for that to open enrollment, so why not use the prior year, and if you can document that your income in the coming year will be less, then you go through the estimating thing and take your chances. I like your thinking on this Cathy. Tom Newark, CA