Leaderboard

Ugh. Fired has to mean fired. Quit has to mean quit Former customer who went on a rant, with profanities and threats to sue if we ever contacted them again, asked to order again. They are now livid because I am not replying, since they stated if I replied I would be sued. I am twisted enough to sort of laugh, but not twisted enough to feel sad some people act like they are. The impetus was this person was reselling their software license to others, and was caught (by one of their clients who contacted me for assistance). Our former customer had to deal with at least one unhappy client of theirs, when I refused to assist - directing them back to the person who improperly took money fro them for a license they had no permission to sell. Today's messages from them started with asking to order again, trying to blame a former employee, then dropped back to the same vile stuff that got them fired in the first place. All messages came from the same email address, so I doubt the person really had an employee acting without their knowledge, since the email address is personal in nature, not a business account or name. The firing consisted of a letter saying we were no longer doing business with them, and a full refund for their most recent order. I suspect the issue today is now that the new year is here, their ill gotten license is no longer working for them, nor for the unsuspecting folks who were duped by them.

DD is always an interesting topic. In many (most?) cases, it is not easier or cheaper for the employer. It does keep employees from taking time during work to deposit. Had a conversation with a person from a credit union, new to our software, who could not find anyone at their own office who knew how to handle ACH. The other "rub" is many bank's/CU's have some sort of payroll product they offer, which they likely get more money (commission and probably sign up bonus). With the change in check processing, there is little, and sometimes no delay, in accessing funds by check compared to before all went electronic. Especially with deposit by phone app.

There are a bunch of us who have very similar lists. If we put those lists together end to end, there might be enough length to encircle the Capitol Building and prevent the legis-vermin from getting IN to cause more trouble for us! (I can dream can't I? )

While frustrating, this one is a piece of cake. A few years back, a former customer was on trial for tax fraud. (IIIRC, was filing using inappropriate items, such as EITC, and was keeping the extra. I think they were taking advantage of folks not native to the US, with little education or experience. Was making sure they got something "back" from his pocket, but had their refund deposited in an account he controlled!) Phone subpoena from the IRS for us. (Was actually not bad, once we explained our business.) The problem was of course, this person again IIRC, was proving there is no fool like someone defending themselves in court, saw we had to make a statement, and made threats against me and my family if we cooperated. Forwarded that information up the chain. The person was convicted and will be in the care of us (via Uncle Sam) for quite some time. Had another who was running a series of filling stations. Would skip out on paying any withholding, UI, etc, then "go out of business" and start up as a new entity AT THE SAME LOCATIONS. We figured it out on our end and refused to do business with them, and after a year or so after we figured it out, the government caught up as well, deposing us along the way (to see if they could hook us into the liability chain, deep pockets lose and all that). F. Gump was a GENIUS.

The problem is that the people who do this aren't actually getting "refunds" they are getting money they never had - EITC and CTC. So if the government (you and I) wants to give them "free" money and the cost to get it comes out of the "free" money, they don't care. This is one reason I have never liked EITC. I have a whole list.

And for those employees who know exactly how much to make, when to quit, to make the highest EIC while sometimes supplementing with unreported cash jobs.

I was sitting in line at the bank drive-up one Friday (with dozen of others) and it hit me how ludicrous it was to drive across town with a piece of paper to have a person data enter that document into their computer so money could be moved from the company's account to my account. I gladly pay the DD fees every payroll.

It was originally supposed to be a refund of Social Security and Medicare taxes, but it's grown beyond that. It's really a subsidy to the businesses that do not pay a living wage for those who work full-time.

I've been thinking I should update folks on my former client. After his last email, I refused to respond and had silence from him. Then, when he got back the blank checks we had mailed (from when we did paper-check payroll for him, which ended some years ago when we switched him to an online service with direct deposit), he emailed again asking if that meant we weren't doing payroll anymore - ignoring the part of my letter saying no interruption in payroll service. I responded back saying no, employee on direct deposit for years and we have no need for his checks. More silence . Hooray! And for Jerry @Medlin Software - I know your system does direct deposit. The guy's tiny bank was clueless and refused to work with us, plus the online folks directly debit the client's bank which means WE get paid every month instead of once or twice a year. Yours is still the easiest pr system I've ever used - and it *does* do household employee payroll if you sweet-talk it just right.

And I thought I had problems with my client's issues with IRS! I do not envy you with this. People can really be so ugly...

I remember Woolworth's, and many other things my kids scoff at... Cash payroll has a fixed cost you can easily estimate. X hours to prepare, no unexpected later costs likely. Non-cash payroll can always have a "later" unexpected expense, impossible to control. Just replacing genuine lost checks costs money, let alone HDC issues, issues with a second party getting the funds, and so on. DD is probably the cleanest as you primarily have to worry about a disgruntled co account owner. There can be other issues you pay to "defend", but probably rare enough to not worry about. Enough with non-positive for me today, on to good things! My h e double hockey sticks week is 2.5 hours from being over. Monday won't be fun, but it will be easier. I may sit in the RV and work from there, just to pretend I am on the road somewhere! Business remains good, and most customers are friendly, Happy and healthy wishes to all...

It is a legal term. In my example, the check cashing place has a properly endorsed check, no hint of fraud, and you have to honor it. Stop payment, loss claim, does not matter. You have to deal with the employee, and probably, at least at first, have to pay the employee as well as the check cashing place. Your recourse is only with the person the check was made out to... The third party gets PAID no matter what, if it meets the due course rules (and in practice, even if it does not, since it is likely cheaper to pay than to fight). https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/3/3-302 Likely examples and explanations by online search. Those that work in large payroll offices are familiar with this, as given enough volume and time, they will see it. Came up for me many years ago when a payroll check was :"washed". The party who got the "washed" check could have easily claimed the check met the HiDC rules. Thankfully, was only for someone I was preparing payroll for. The employer ended up paying both the employee (who must have lost the check) as well as the recipient of the washed check. It was a business with high turnover, and the employee turned over shortly after - I have no idea why... I did get to see the washed check. it was done very well. Lost "art" now, since anyone can print checks as long as they have a valid routing and account number. No more "Catch Me if You Can". Cash is the only way to safely pay employees - safely meaning no later risk of having to pay twice assuming some sort of valid proof of receipt is collected. There are still some who choose this method, and I have not seen any locality where cash is not allowed. If I were back in the days where I was paying lower paid employees with fair turnover, with my current knowledge, it would be cash payouts for me. (Secondary reason, the local officials would likely give me a concealed carry permit again, with cash carrying being the reason).

DD can be handy, but just hope if not the sole account of the employee, there is never a dispute with the others who have access to the account. The law is somewhat grey, say if the non-employee party takes the funds, and the employee says they never got the funds. You may find yourself paying twice, and resorting to checks again. (It has and does happen). Checks can have the same issue. Employee goes to a check cashing place (for instance) which gets the holder in due course issue involved. Employee then says the check was lost. You likely have to pay both as it is the cheaper way to go. One other, of the top of my head, is when an employee wants you to act as their money manager, depositing into multiple accounts. Opens up the issue of access of other parties, and doubling the cost and trouble should the deposit go awry (it happens too). Just another cost of being an employer... As I sit in CA where another year goes by while our elected officials refuse to alter our UI system and actually fund it from normal contributions. Instead, they let the feds "garnish" surviving employers at end of year. It is all about avoiding their next election opponent being able to put out a mailer saying the incumbent raised employer taxes (since the electorate does not understand or care what actually is happening).

DITTO!! Well said!!!

Thanks again for weighing in on this. I will certainly take your recommendation under advisement. We shall see what the final determination is for 2014 and whether the TA has any input and/or advice at all.

I remember a former boss of mine told me one year that he had resolved to eat more and enjoy it. He was making fun of all those failed diet resolutions in his past. About half-way through the year, he admitted that was a mistake - he was actually keeping that resolution and had gained 15 pounds since New Years!

it always amazes me that clients think i am automatically their retirement expert as well as their tax expert - and lets not forget financial investment expert, real estate expert, and all around "I don't want to bother to ask my lawyer so i'll bug my accountant" expert.

I've always enjoyed firing a client because it is usually for good reason and I got peace of mind. They are usually a problem for one reason or another. The last two I fired were a brother and sister, partners in real estate wanting me to be a partner in tax fraud. I politely explained that it would be better to find someone else that may suit their needs. Yes, they got mad and said I was abandoning them but I kept my cool, gave them my reasons and wished them well. Catherine, if your guy calls again tell him how you really feel about his case and what you think is best for both of you. Or, send him to me so I could fire him.

One of my two favorite pig analogies. Here's the other one, which I try to remember when tempted to explain tax rules to some people:: "Never try to teach a pig to sing. All you get for your efforts is bad music and a frustrated pig".

Well isn't this ironic timing. One of the 3 I've fired just had his brother / attorney call to threaten legal action against me for improperly preparing his return in 2015. He demanded 2 years ago that i depreciate his rental property BEFORE he placed it into service. I refused and declared he was rehabbing it and you can't depreciate an investment (he had no occupancy permit or working utilities so how could he rent it?). Last year (one of the reasons his questions were so stupid) he demanded I section 179 his residential rental property so that he could get a massive refund and buy another property. Supposedly a real estate seminar he went to said this was okay. It took about 15 minutes for his brother to recognize how uninformed his client is on the subject.