jklcpa

Exactly, John!

I'm with Lion in that I won't efile a return that I haven't prepared and agree with what the others here have posted. There's more going on with this woman and her return. Be glad she left your office. If she had her return completed by hand without using a software program, she would have been exempt from the e-filing requirement in NY. Why didn't she just mail it herself?

It's not new and it's not secret. I think it came out of the PACI in 2004. Found this: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/final_paci_report.pdf and this: http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-Profits/Political-Activity-Compliance-Initiative-%282004-Election%29

The NOL dies with the dissolution of the old C corp. It doesn't affect shareholders' basis or pass through, it just goes away.

I agree with not making an issue over the few minutes too. We don't know that this employee left early though. I was wondering more about this employee not taking a lunch break, or if the OP is just giving a generalized simple example to get an answer to her question.

Link to US DOL and FLSA re: rounding of hours: http://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/compliance/whdfs53.htm

Good one, Jack! lol I still have my slide rule too, and an abacus.

Yes, I moved it, and just because it mentions arguments from both side does not mean that it isn't a political piece. The article mentions the benefits of the credit to outline what is possibly at stake, but the main points of the article are that this is part of the comprehensive tax reform, the cost savings if it is eliminated, budgetary offset considerations, possible veto by the President despite his past support for R&D, and what the role of the government should be to administer or support programs such as these. I really like this sentence: "The role of any government is to defend and promote the interests of all its citizens and to administer programs that are beneficial to all, including those who are underrepresented." My opinion is this: This program has been successful since its inception and I think it should continue. It is part of our government supporting the welfare of our citizens, it fosters research and innovation, and patients with less rare conditions might also benefit from the research. What I don't know and would be interested to find out is how many drugs that do work were developed under this program that are now not being manufactured because big pharma decided that particular drug did not benefit enough people or was not profitable. I'm sure that many of us here have read stories along those lines, or might know someone personally where this was the case. I don't know the statistics on that. Does anyone have the stats on drugs that were developed under this program that aren't being manufactured because big pharma deemed them to not be profitable enough? KC, you didn't specify why you had mixed feelings on this, but mine come from trying to find a balance between supporting a program that works toward the general welfare of the population vs supporting the for-profit big pharma corporations.

Yes, it should be grossed up if the company is paying the employees' share of FICA and Medicare. The new gross would be the net check received divided by 0.9235. That is the gross amount that the FICA and Medicare will be based on, not the net amount that was actually paid to the employees.

NECPA, technically you may be in violation of the ATX agreement, but you really only have one place of business that you are providing service to your clients, and your situation is not unlike someone bringing some work home with them. The OP has a different setup because he actually has more than one place of business, he has employees working at that second location, and is presumably meeting with clients and delivering services and returns there also. If that is the case, Jack is correct that he is in violation by accessing ATX remotely in his circumstance.

I got snail mail from ATX last week bragging about how the ATX team recognized the troubles of the 2012 season, how they listed to their customers, and touting the 2013 season as being trouble free. They think their customer service is outstanding and want to earn back my trust and want me back next year. There was no mention of anything being free. I only glanced at it as it went in the bin but seemed to be the same old thing and similar pricing with the usual 10% markup.

The one thing that stands out to me is that in your gain calculations at sale you are recapturing 100% of the depreciation taken. I think that only 50% should be recaptured because the one time that depreciation recapture can be avoided is death, and since the 50% of the unit owned by the deceased was included in the estate assets, it had the potential to be taxed at the estate tax rates.

Joan, that sounds like you've picked up some adware or malware.

I also have a gas station client and agree with what Rich and DevM said above. I use FIFO for the inventory and the POS system and client's summary of gallonage. He knows how many gallons he has in those tanks at the end of each day. It's not that hard to determine ending inventory and see if the cost of sales makes sense. My bigger challenge is that the supplier nets the electronic debits charged against client's checking account for the gasoline purchases against the credit card sales owed back to the client. There's no logical pattern for how they combine or net the activity. Believe me, inventory and COS is a snap compared to reconciling cash, deposits in transit, and ending payables because of the netting.

KC, I'm wondering what type of device you are posting from, or if you experience a delay in the post and are clicking 'post' again, or if something else is going on with the forum. Yesterday I deleted a duplicate posting of yours entitled "IRS prodded...." There were 2 identical posts with the exact same posting time of 1:41pm. I deleted the one that no one was viewing at the time. Then last night at 11:23pm the same thing happened with the gas station post by joanmcq. Again, 2 identical posts with the same time stamp. I deleted one of those also. Both of the deleted posts are still on the moderator's control panel. Eric, if the system is allowing 2 posts each time KC posts, this might explain why she was getting that spam warning, because it was thinking she was making multiple posts at the same time. Now that the control has been turned off, it's easier to see why the might have been happening.

Does that happen even when you spend time typing something out, or is it always on the new topics that are a cut-and-paste from another website? I could see where the system could think you are posting too fast if you open a new topic, do a CnP, and click on post that could all be done within a matter of a few seconds.

Even if ADP wasn't administering the plan, it's possible that a smart customer service rep would catch this and code it to be reported as taxable wages, BUT I've also had dealings with the less-than-smart reps that will report the compensation which ever way the client tells them. mrichman333, it doesn't make any difference about the 50-or-less employees, but if the company has an HRA plan, that in itself is considered a medical plan and the employees applying for individual coverage would need to know this when filling out the application. I agree with Jack that it sounds like this employer doesn't know what he's doing, and the reimbursement was reported incorrectly. At least the employee called and questioned it so that it can be corrected before any more time passes.

You're welcome, Jack. KC, you spammer, you! No idea.

I agree that we don't know whether or not the W-2 is correct or not, and neither does mrichman333. I also think Jack's assumption is reasonable and the client should be able to provide, or obtain, a copy of the HRA plan summary if a proper plan really exists.

All of the attachments you've made on the forum are found by clicking on your user name at the upper right then My Settings > Manage Attachments. The limit is 8 mb, so that may be your only problem and not the size of any given picture.

This will almost certainly be challenged, and it does nothing to solve the problem of unethical preparers. http://www.accountingtoday.com/news/irs_watch/aicpa-says-irs-voluntary-tax-preparer-certification-program-is-unlawful-71073-1.html Full test for those that don't like clicking links: The American Institute of CPAs has sent a letter expressing strong concern with the Internal Revenue Service’s proposed voluntary certification program for tax return preparers, saying it “would cause significant legal problems that may ultimately frustrate the IRS’s goals, confuse the public, and lead to litigation.” The AICPA expressed its concerns to IRS commissioner John Koskinen in a meeting and letter last month, but has increased its level of concern in the latest letter (see AICPA Opposes IRS Voluntary Tax Preparer Certification). In a letter Tuesday to Koskinen, AICPA chairman Bill Balhoff and AICPA president and CEO Barry C. Melancon wrote, “We have repeatedly expressed to you and your colleagues that our members have very significant concerns regarding a voluntary certification program and urged the IRS to have a formal comment period to obtain and consider the public’s views prior to moving forward. … However, it is our understanding that the IRS has no intention of slowing down or considering viable alternatives. Therefore, we feel compelled to consider our next steps, and to raise more formally our legal and policy concerns with the IRS’s current path.” Under the proposed voluntary program, tax return preparers would receive an IRS certificate for display in return for completing a continuing education program that includes a comprehension assessment. The AICPA’s letter emphasizes the following points: • First, no statute authorizes the proposed program; • Second, the program will inevitably be viewed as an end-run around Loving v. IRS, (a federal court ruling rejecting an earlier IRS attempt to regulate tax return preparers); • Third, the IRS has evidently concluded, in developing the proposed program, that it need not comply with the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act. This is incorrect; and • Finally, the current proposal is arbitrary and capricious because it fails to address the problems presented by unethical tax return preparers, runs counter to evidence presented to the IRS, and will create market confusion. Describing the proposed program as “unlawful and improper,” the June 24 letter stated that it is essential that any regulatory approach instituted by the IRS to address this issue has a firm legal basis and reflects sound policy. “We continue to believe that additional regulation of tax return preparers might yield significant benefits and that the IRS can achieve these objectives while remaining consistent with Loving and other statutory limitations on the IRS’s authority,” the letter stated. “We have sought to work with the IRS to achieve workable solutions to regulate tax return preparers and protect the public, and we stand ready to continue these efforts,” the AICPA wrote.

I'm sorry for your loss. It's never easy saying goodbye, and no matter how long their life, it's never long enough. I bet the three little kittens are wonderfully entertaining. Nice that you rescued them.

They sure are cute little 3 year olds, Eric. Pictures are over in the politics section in the "Gun Control Works" topic. http://www.atxcommunity.com/topic/15199-gun-control-works/

There is no sale. You tell your tax program that the assets were converted to personal use. Then the person transfers them to the S corp and records them as Old Jack described. The S corp will continue on to depreciate them as if they hadn't changed entities using the carryover basis. In the S corp return, it will show the original depreciable basis and the accumulated depreciation from the Sch C as the opening numbers and depreciate from there. The excess of FMV over the adjusted basis on the date of transfer is nondepreciable.

If you are planning to see any of the war memorials, I'd recommend you see the Korean War Memorial. I found that one to be very moving and eerie. It is a highly polished wall with images of soldiers etched into it, and also has a squad on patrol of 19 free standing full sized soldiers whose images are reflected in the wall. The reflections almost looked like ghosts among the men etched on the wall. I get chills thinking about it. ETA - what you have lined up is great. We love the Air & Space Museum.