jklcpa

Yes, the official date that the IRS will begin processing 1040s is 1/31. Even if your software vendor will allow earlier e-filing, they would be holding the efiles until 1/31, and paper returns won't be processed by the IRS until the start date. http://www.journalofaccountancy.com/News/20139306.htm

<<C-EZ shows up and I can't find out how to suppress it. Can it be done?>> Yes, on the "C" input screen in the top section and over toward the right, there is a box that says "suppress schedule C-EZ"

Yes, you would use backup and restore to move the files from one computer to another. Backup to a removable USB or other removable media, and then restore the file to the other computer's hard drive.

Taxed listed the default path for those using stand-alone installations last year. I'd call Drake; they know where the ATX files were stored if you were networked.

Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays, and a happy, healthy, and prosperous 2014 to all!

If this is in one of my few bookkeeping clients and I catch it right away, I gross it up for the withholdings and bonus it out. For my larger clients that have their own bookkeepers, if the bkkpr calls me to ask, it is also usually pretty soon after the transaction occurs, I would suggest they do the same thing. The last one that I had that was significant dollars, I booked as a loan to shareholder, charged the interest, and had the client call his attorney to draw up a promissory note to document. It was also documented in the minutes of the annual meeting. This was in a closely held C corp with only one owner.

Another one that I use frequently is "Ctrl+F" that brings up a "find" box to allow a word search within the current page. Mine's a little box that appears at the toolbar area, either on the very left- or righthand side of the page.

I would disagree with that last statement. The CP2057 notice is generated by the AUR, IRS is getting the same result, and it probably costs them less, on an overall basis in this program, to process the 1040Xs received than the handling of the correspondence received back in from the CP2000s. I think if a person chooses to ignore the CP2057 and do nothing, eventually the IRS' system would spit out a CP2000.

The CP2057 was started as a pilot program to deal with the millions of cases each year that weren't pursued because their costs to follow up and collect outweighed the benefit to the agency. The program is supposed to use less staff and lower costs to bring the money into the Treasury, and cut down on the correspondence between the taxpayer and agency.

I've handled this issue many times over the years just as Michaelmars and verbanik have said.

I didn't see your post earlier and it's not in the deleted content. Maybe it got sucked into a black hole of cyberspace. It's a great series of pictures, btw.

I, too, find the comparison useful. If the refund or balance due is different than the prior year, the clients invariably ask why that is. Now I start with the comparison as a summary of the return and show where any differences are. Those clients that have a good handle on their finances usually don't want to go over the entire return page by page and want to stop after the comparison. I'll continue to the return and give the highlights or any areas that I feel need to be specifically addressed in more detail. Then I move on to the state. With many of my clients over 60 and 65, my state gives several additional tax deductions or exemptions that I like to point out.

Eric, that's great. Using the members section, I was able to apply only the state as a filter and it worked well. Thanks again.

Your kids aren't the only ones!

Thanks, Eric! Both the quote and paste functions are working for me again.

KC, the search does work with less than 4 letters in the member section. Here's how: Click on "Members" just below the forum title. That opens a box that has a button at the righthand side "More Search Options" that brings up a more detailed box where filters can be applied. I can choose to search for a member whose name contains , for example "NC" or "CPA". From the filter dropdown, choose "contains" and enter "CPA" and then scroll to the bottom of that page and click "Apply Filters". This filtering does work with less than 4 letters. Try it and see. Of course, searching for something like "OH" would also bring up anyone that had that in their name, like "Johnson" for example.

John, that might be a good idea. The general search function doesn't include details included in user names or signature lines, but it is possible to apply a filter when searching specifically within the member list. For example, I could filter for members only having "NC" in the name and I would find you and some other NC preparers.

I would also suggest calling. I'm wondering if it could be something as simple as another company having a typo in the EIN on their 941, where this unrelated company could have filed using your client's EIN. That may also explain the difference in the address. BTW, speaking of the address, how did your client receive the notice of intent to levy if the address used is OR and you say they were only ever in NY? Was this notice sent to one of the officers of the now-dissolved corp? Please update us when you do find out what caused this.

Jack, who said anything about "purchasing CPE credits", and how do you know those credits aren't EARNED anyway? My state and the AICPA has the same minimum requirement as Joan posted. I've always completed more than the minimum requirements, and the credit tally is not my first priority. If I need to learn more on a subject, I take the course whether I need more credits or not. I purchased the ability to view, complete and EARN CPE credits by participating in online webinars, without a specific limitation as to the number. I could have purchased a smaller number of courses, but my state society offered a nice discount program that made sense to purchase the unlimited package so that I can EARN credits at a lower cost. I certainly do not sit and waste my valuable time taking courses that will not benefit my practice or enhance my knowledge. This program has allowed me to choose from many more subjects that are more appropriate to my practice and clientele, and to choose courses that are convenient to my schedule. This is preferable to being limited to attending local live classes that are so similar that they are almost repeats year after year. That would truly be a real waste of money and that would do nothing to enhance one’s skills! Besides lowering my per credit cost, my other reason for purchasing the webinars this year is because I'm spending a lot more time caring for my elderly mother and I've had to rework my schedule around her needs and her doctor’s appointments, so this purchase in 2013 was also done in part to accommodate that as well. The Surgent online webinars are the same courses that are being taught to a live group, with the added requirement that the participants answer questions throughout the day, and answer a certain percentage of them correctly. That is something that is not required here of participants in any live group study courses. I've sat in those conference rooms and lecture halls over the last 32 years, paying a higher price for it too, and I’ve watched as other participants are distracted by their cell phone messages, answer text messages, talk, read the newspaper, snore, take extended breaks, and even complete other self-study courses while attending, so don't tell me that everyone that sits in a live seminar is EARNING their CPE.

I can still log in and I requested a refund last Feb from ATX.

I'm not scrambling now, but I purchased unlimited webinars from Surgent for this calendar year to finish up remaining CPE from my last biennial reporting that ended 6/30/13, so now I do need to make the most of that purchase before it expires at the end of this month.

Happy Birthday, Eric!

I rolled one over for you to test. Here's what the ES screen had on it for 2012: Top left a "T" for taxpayer, and at the right for 2013, an OP code of "R" to apply the overpayment from 2012 to the first quarter's 2013 voucher. In the boxes below that, the 2013 estimates that I entered were $3125 for each quarter's for federal, $375 for state each quarter. 2013 ES screen after rollover shows this: "T" for taxpayer at top and in the left-hand side, $207 in the overpayment applied from 2012 $2918 in the first quarter's estimated payment, $3125 in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th. All boxes with numbers are shown in green, meaning that those fields are flagged by the system for review because those came over automatically and needed to be checked by the preparer to make sure those are accurate. You can right click on that field to remove the flag and leave it as is, or if the client paid something different or missed the payment, simply type the paid amount in the box. State amounts of $375 per quarter also rolled forward. So to answer your question, YES, the estimates that were set up in 2012 came over automatically to the proper fields in 2013, and it is showing the proper reduced payment for the 1st quarter federal voucher because of the overpayment that was left in.

Hi Dennis, I entered the 2013 estimates on screen "ES" as overrides in the boxes on the right-hand side of that screen. I didn't let Drake calc them at all or use the "ETA" screen (estimated tax adjustments). I used Drake to prepare my 2012 returns. I haven't rolled any of those returns over to the 2013 program yet.

Jack, I didn't delete your post, I thought you deleted it yourself. Now this thread has several posts follow up posts that reference the gov't healthcare site that now seem to come out of the blue. Anyway, we have topics over in the politics section on the ACA where that site's bashing is going on. This topic was supposed to be about the password hacking done on the social media sites.