jklcpa

Right now there's a little shield in a small blue circle at the 2 o'clock position on the edge of Eric's and my avatars. I wasn't on here enough to see if there were more shields immediately after the upgrade that Eric may have disabled, but I believe that is what he was referring to.

That's interesting! You've had problems with this site's appearance and postings before that no one else had and that seemed specific to your machine. These are questions that I can't answer that Eric would have to address. Perhaps there are settings in our individual browsers that the site uses to format its appearance on our individual machines.

Can't explain that. I have Win 10 and this site looks identical on both Firefox and Chrome.

Where to find "donate" depends on the platform you are using to view the forum. If using the desktop version, there is a clickable "Donate" in the blue banner at the top of the home page. Mobile versions use the hamburger at the top right as Lion described.

I'm not Lion, but I had trouble last month and had to wait for the IRS letter in the mail to complete the process. The IRS couldn't i.d. me even though: previously had e-services setup in this name and address, have lived at this address with same mortgage for 22+ years, been a CPA since early 1980s with PTIN, CAF, and ERO all in same name, and have had the same phone contract and same phone number since I got a bag phone in the late 1980s, and used the VISA credit card through AAA that I've had forever in my name, kind of like the bag phone thing. The only thing I can think of is that the phone and credit card were initially acquired in my maiden name, but have both been in my current name since the early '90s. With all of that matching, it's very frustrating that the IRS still can't i.d. me.

SMLLC's operating as sole proprietorships would follow the federal filing and file a Sch C for PA purposes. For LLCs that are taxed as C corps, PA would expect a corp return PA RCT-101 to be filed. Also, for periods prior to Jan 1 2016 for LLCs including those being taxed on Sch C as disregarded entities, PA required filing the PA RCT-101 for the Capital Stock/Franchise Tax. https://revenue-pa.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/1382/related/1 https://revenue-pa.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/972/related/1 I think it is odd that PA is asking for a 2019 corporate return. Maybe some of our PA preparers will chime in with more information on this specific issue.

Instructions for tracing are on the IRS page that follows. https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/questions-and-answers-about-the-first-economic-impact-payment-topic-f-payment-issued-but-lost-stolen-destroyed-or-not-received

@Terry D, As for problem #1, keep trying to fax it and keep a copy of the transmission log. Also, even though you've prepared a written response with documentation, be sure to include the page that has the 3 boxes where the client indicates no agreement, partial agreement, or agrees to all the changes. See my response on that immediately above. Each of those tells the IRS' computer what type of response you are sending to the proposed changes. For problem # 2 suggest either you or the client check the online transcript of account. Even though the 1st stimulus payments were made by direct deposit that does not mean that the 2nd payments were made in that same manner. Checks could have been lost in the mail or prepaid debit cards assumed to be junk mail. I agree with Deb that a trace may need to be put on the payments if clients' accounts show they were paid. Several of my clients received stimulus payments that were not in even dollar amounts and they assumed that it was the prior year's tax refund, and told me they never received the stimulus payments.

The same thing happened to a new client couple of mine this year. They received a CP2000, handled it themselves, and made payment in agreement of all changes. The IRS computer never cleared it from its system because they failed to send back the page with the box marked agreeing to the changes. I was lucky to get through to an agent on the practitioner priority line who explained what happened and was able to see the payment in their system.

Technically speaking a husband-wife LLC can be treated as a disregarded entity but only if in a community property state. The problem is for those not in community property states, then the IRS would be looking for a partnership return. It's been about 6 years since I originally wrote this, but here is a quote that I continue to repost each time this subject comes up:

It goes on line 13g of Schedule K for "Other Credits", and use code letter "O" is for backup withholding. It then flows to Sch K-1, box 13, also code "O".

I'd check within your print settings to make sure the watermark wasn't inadvertantly chosen. As to the amounts on filed returns changing - were these returns filed before the mid-March update for the unemployment exclusion?

Oh, I didn't say he couldn't ever borrow against the property, but it shouldn't be done simultaneously or very soon after the exchange. Borrowing is certainly allowed, but there shouldn't be the appearance of borrowing so soon as to seem like immediately pulling out more equity.

Ron, did the taxpayer receive some funds back from the QI?

Rules of 1031 exchange: like-kind timing value debt equity In the scenario provided by C.Frog, we'll assume that #1 & 2 have been met. #3 value seems ok, as you say, both properties have the same FMV. #4 - debt. Taxpayer is OK with debt because debt is at least as much as the debt on old property, BUT this increase in debt is causing a problem with #5 that deals with equity. #5 - the net equity in the new property must be at least as much as in the old property. Net equity in old property is $i million - $85K = $915K. Net equity in new property must be at least as much as that, and it isn't. Net equity in new property is $1 million - $150 = $850K. In order to meet the requirement of #5 in the scenario as written, if a replacement property of exactly $1 million (the same as old property) is to be obtained then the debt can't be more than the $85K, OR if the TP ends up with the higher debt of $150K then a property with FMV of $1,065,000 would need to be purchased in order to have net equity in the new property of the same $915K of property given up. One way to help avoid this problem is to always trade up and expect to bring some cash to the table for closing. In the fictitious example provided, both properties were the same value but borrowing increased by $65K (150K new borrowing - 85K old borrowing). Another way to look this same $65K is that that is the decrease in net equity of $915K of the old property to the new one's equity of $850K. (915-850 = 65K)

IRS could view this as tax avoidance by pulling money out so soon after the 1031 exchange, and especially since the funds weren't being used to further the business purpose of this property. The taxpayer certainly can borrow more or refinance, but the longer between the exchange and borrowing, the better. Better yet would be that the borrowing not occur until a subsequent tax year. AND, the taxpayer should also have meticulous records of how the funds were used for the property in order to justify the transaction. Six months seems too close for comfort.

In this scenario, taxpayer has a taxable gain because net equity in new property is less than net equity in the property given up.

It is used as the "downpayment" and that is why the gift of equity many times is @ 20%. It's one way to allow the sale to occur earlier because the purchaser doesn't have to save up those funds in order to qualify for the mortgage, and it also allows the borrower/purchaser to avoid having to purchase mortgage insurance.

Right! After reading this thread, Venmo is a hard "no" for me. I take cash, checks, and already have Square and Paypal. That is enough for my clients, especially now that Square is also offering ACH debit directly from a bank account, and clients always have the ability to pay me via online banking too, or they can go to a MAC machine.

I have one that was filed in mid-March and still no refund, and the practitioner priority said return was rejected for unknown reason and can't do a thing about it. It is one that was completed in February and waited to file until the IRS and our programs were updated for the unemployment exclusion. It is the simplest of returns: single over 65, small W-2 and 1099-SSA each with withholding, $8K of unemployment totally excluded, std deduction, no RRC claimed. That is everything on the return, about $35K AGI, and agent said it could be up to another 2 months for the refund to be issued.

Read the post and discuss with any of your clients, but we aren't going to get into this any further here. I personally don't engage in this with clients until it becomes law.

Hi ATL EA, welcome to the group and thanks for that explanation. Clearly I was wrong in what I most recently posted and have hidden that post.

If it's a qualified joint venture, then they split each item and report on 2 Sch Cs as long as it isn't an LLC or rental real estate. Basically, by doing this they are electing to not file as a partnership. Here's more information: https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/election-for-married-couples-unincorporated-businesses#:~:text=A qualified joint venture is,be treated as a partnership.

I'd try entering the withholding as an estimate or other payment. That will take it off from the withholding line and still give credit for the amount paid toward the tax liability. It's won't be on the correct line, but I'd rather do that than enter nonexistent income to the return.

You might also try going back to that original site and then click on the option where you block popups from that particular site.