Crank

https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/06/01/new-jersey-imposes-state-obamacare-style-individual-mandate/

Sheesh.  Now the states are getting into the act.  I believe Mass. has done the same thing.

If its really what you want then by all means go for it.  I assume you will regret it if you dont.  When I was studying for the CPA I took a review class and the best advice I got was. 

"Remember, the test was written by individuals and is designed for individuals.  Many have passed so dont look at it like its impossible.  If you want to do it, and you prepare sufficiently, you can do it!"

And I did on my very first attempt.  Its a great feeling!

Just a thought.  Are you sure the numbers are for 2017 only.  Ive had 1098-Ts that pull in other years info such as scholarship info for 2017 and the first semester of 2018 which could create a taxable situation.  I usually like to get the term printouts from the school to be sure they are only allocating the correct year items to the 1098-T

I want in on this class too.  Priceless! 

https://support.atxinc.com/download/formdevelopmentstatus.aspx

8863 is now scheduled for 2/2/18 

~$200-250 which includes the PA local but no planning.  I know...Im low

Speaking of the PA local, Im annoyed that the W2 detail page doesnt sum local wages and taxes this year

Well, first of all it wasnt an assumption.  It was a question based on the information that has been provided (mostly by the media) so far as the proposed tax changes.  Last I checked this was a forum for the discussion of income taxes.  That should include present tax law as well as proposed tax law.

If you have better things to do then why did you bother to grace me with your brilliant reply?

Ahh I missed that.  Thanks for the reply!

Jack, as usual, you are extremely helpful 

Ive been wondering about the proposed new tax law and the elimination of the personal exemption where dependents are over the age of 18 and dont qualify for the new 2000 child tax credit.

Example: MFJ with one dependent > age 18

1. Increase in standard deduction results in reduced taxable income of $11300 (24000-12700)

2. Loss of 3 personal exemptions results in increased taxable income of $12300 (4100*3)

Net increase in taxable income of $1000.

Is this correct?  If so it would increase with each additional dependent.

6 hours ago, Pacun said:

Use option 2. Debt canceled during insolvency provided you can prove he was insolvent the day before the debt was forgiven.

I had a client go this route.  Had to gather all assets and liabilities to prove insolvency.  Darned if he wasnt.  Him and his wife made good income too.  Claimed she was a chronic spender.  Ouch!

Ive always used CAPS for returns.

Foxit Reader also allows .pdf signing and its free.

23 minutes ago, Richcpaman said:

With this years software...  Just clearing all the right boxes on the 8867 for anyone entails a $150 fee.

 

Isn't that the truth!  This TP had the CTC.

Lots of good comments.  Thank you all.  Still scratching my head over this one.  We'll see how it plays out.  

Just watched it.  Good video.  Im not sure I can extract the money from her but also, I cant hold her supporting documents hostage either.  Of course I wont give her the completed return without payment.

Ive been requesting DLs for years.  Entering the info this year even though its not required.  I consider it additional due diligence.

Had a new client referred to me by a long time client.  Single mother/grandmother with AGI ~38K.  Completed the return and was scheduling a pick-up when she balked at the fee ($150) saying "dont you take it out of the refund?" and the client that referred her told her that I do take it out of the refund.  Said she would have to talk to the referrer and ask why she told her that.  Im wonder what she would have done if she owed instead.

It's a first for me and Im assuming that she will want her documents back to go somewhere else.  Not sure how to handle this.  I have to give her the documents back but I should receive some compensation for the time I put into preparing the return.  Anyone else have to deal with something like this?  Suggestions appreciated.  Thanks

Deb,

Thank you!!!!

Yes I have the 8879s included.  I never customized the letter.  It was always fine as is. Ill have to look at it

Thanks

No i didnt.  I print out the return before efiling.  I noticed before the 15.9 update the Federal stated it would be efiled but the state said to mail.  Now after the update both say to mail.  I hope I dont have to create an efile to print the correct letter.

Thank you.  Yes that is what is needed.  Sheesh, kinda stupid if you ask me.

Even though I have efile information populated (1040 EF info & PA 40 info forms) the client letter still states that the client is to mail the federal & state returns.  Am I missing something?  Anyone else have this issue?

Thank you all for the assistance!

Well, the TP seems to be getting nowhere with the Bursar's office and an amended 1098-T.  I am/was hesitant about putting in the correct calendar year numbers on the return and having them not match the 1098-T that IRS received from the institution, but it looks like that's the only way to try and straighten this out and do what's correct.  Can the TP expect a letter from the IRS, or a reduced refund, if the TP filed 1098-T doesn't match IRS records?

No apologies necessary.  The scholarships are listed on the Spring 2017 Term Statement but the effective date is listed as 12/8/16.

It looks like this has been screwed up since the student started college in Fall 2015.  For example The Spring 2016 statement has billing applied in 2015 and scholarships applied in 2016 so no doubt last years 1098-T didnt follow the calendar year but we had no way of knowing that last year. I dont have the beginning Fall 2015 Statement but from the l statements I do have it looks like 2105 included tuition & scholarships for 2015 plus tuition for the Spring 2016 semester.  Hence, the screwed up from the beginning.

I do have the Bursar's transaction sheets.  The Billed amount is correct for 2016.  The scholarships are the problem.  They applied 2017 scholarships ( in addition to the 2016 scholarships) in late 2016.  Therefore there is a year of billing and a year and a half of scholarships applied to 2016 which makes the scholarships exceed the billed amounts.  They say they cant do anything about when the scholarships are applied but I think thats bull.  They are applied manually and come from the school directly so its not like they get them from somewhere else.  I really have no idea what to do about this.  The school is wrong in my opinion and the TP is not a happy camper missing the credit he deserves and getting taxable income to boot.