Terry D EA

Hey Margaret, did you see the new form to be attached to the Schedule D? The number is 8---- something. It is lines and pages listing all barter transactions as well as any other transactions that a schedule D can contain.

Do you know that you can set the print delivery settings to print the entire tax return in the order that you want it? With the "CLIENT COPY" watermark as well?? I will post how if anyone wants to know. I set mine and I love it when I reach for the printer, grab the return and don't have to sort pages!!!

I do agree with Jainen again with the original post from Lucho as it is a different scenario then what I posted. It just proves that we should agree that each scenario is unique and there is not a one size fits all scenario. My situation , is the parents did choose and agreed to the choice simply because they will be getting married this year. The currently share all expenses and put income into one checking account so they "Chose" which way would benefit them the most. Again, confusing and I am sure that I will miss some questions on the competency test or EA exam with these scenarios.

Lucho, this stuff can be so confusing and if you read it enough times you can get even further confused. I think there still is a choice here and it depends if they each want to claim the EITC then the tie breaker rules apply. Here is an example from the EITC pub. Note if a choice is made then the party who gives up the right to claim the child as their qualifying child also gives up the other tax benefits associated with credits when claiming a dependent child. You, your 5-year-old son, and your son's father lived together all year. You and your son's father are not married. Your son is a qualifying child of both you and his father because he meets the relationship, age, residency, and joint return tests for both you and his father. Your earned income and AGI are $12,000, and your son's father's earned income and AGI are $14,000. Neither of you had any other income. <<<Your son's father agrees to let you treat the child as a qualifying child.>>>>>> This means, if your son's father does not claim your son as a qualifying child for the EIC or any of the other tax benefits listed on page 16, you can claim him as a qualifying child for the EIC and any other tax benefits listed on page 16 for which you qualify.

She does receive SS disability benefits which is her only source of income. With that said, I think you are correct. I will ask her about the disability to be sure.

I have a client who is disabled and has reached the age of 59 1/2. Client DOB: 3/29/1952. Client claims she took distribution from a retirement plan after she reached 59 1/2 years old. She gave me two 1099R forms. One form has code 7 normal distribution and the other has code 1. This is Fidelity and I have seen them screw these things up in the past. Because of the coding, there is a 3k+ balance due to the Feds. Can any of the exceptions apply here? My first response is to as the client if she can show or prove the date she took the distribution and that date should be after 9/29/2011. If she can, how do we proceed? My thoughts are to ask Fidelity to reissue the 1099R with the correct coding. I looked at the 5329 form to see if any of the exceptions may apply but am too tired to think. Any help is appreciated

I'd say go ahead and try to amend the return. It appears the time to petition tax court has passed and nothing obligates the IRS to accept an amended return. However, in this situation, what is there to loose? Not being able to give the client anything position out of this is might be hard to jusity a fee, but nothing ventured nothing gained.

Wouldn't this fall under the same category as attorney fees for either refinance or acquisition??? I don't think you can deduct them.

Must be strictly an ATX problem. I am using TRXPro and do not have that problem.

Agree, file the final return for all the above reasons

This will definitley be nice to find out. Will this apply to 1120S returns? I am anxious to find out.

Ryan, Don't knock yourself out on this. I found the answers and was able to get all the information entered into the return correctly. Transmitted it this evening and all should be fine.

Thanks Joan, I assume you are talking about the taxpayer who is moving to another country. It is not clear at this time, but he may not be employed where he is going. He is going to take care of his ailing sister and plans on living on the withdrawals from teh 401K. As far as the military couple, I have completed that return and entering the information is TRXPro was a challenge. When you tell the program what the military pay was, it did not add one half to the spouse's income. I had to do that manually so column E of the forms showed the correct amounts. Glad I don't do these kind of returns every day. :wacko:

I agree with Catherine that it is most likely taxable. You do have to complete the SS benefits worksheet to determine that amount that is taxable.

Just a thought. The print problem I was having has been solved. I started this year using a new computer and didn't realize that Acrobat Reader wasn't installed on the machine. Now, I don't understand why the Federal forms printed fine but not the State, but since I have downloaded Acrobat Reader, all is well.

You might want to talk to ATX on this to see if their conversion software may help. I highly doubt it though.

Tom and Jainen, I haven't done military for a long time either and besides, I am in NC so CA is definitely strange to me. There is no need to apologize and it is nice to know that you guys are there so we can pick each others brains when we need to. I had another strange one come in today. Client has questions regarding taxes due on withdrawals from a 401K if he moves to another country and maintains a US mailing address. He is over sixty so no early penalty but I think taxes are due but need to do alot of research. So, we always come across these things that test our memory and abilities.

Thanks Jainen and MaMalody, I do agree with both of you but am still questioning the use of the CA540 instead of the 540 NR. My reasoning is the Pub I mentioned earlier stated to use the 540 NR for this client's scenario. The military stuff for CA is as I said earlier, confusing. The input question is my confusion with TRXPro. I have tried to see where to input 1/2 of the military pay. The total income is correct and it appears that the figures are flowing to their respective columns. I will give this thing one final review later this evening before I transmit it. I am going to look further into the form usage to be sure I am using the correct form. I am being extremely careful here as Liberty Tax caused this couple some grief with CA last year for filing it wrong. Thanks for all the help.

Tom, I don't mean to question your knowledge on this subject but it is confusing at best. Here is a statment for military personel from CA PUB 1032. I am still leaning to my original post as the Pub also states the spouse as a CA resident is taxed on one half of the husbands military pay. I am trying to be sure the amounts I have entered on the forms are correct. Thanks. Stationed Outside California – California military servicemembers who leave under PCS orders become nonresidents of California for income tax purposesAll income received or earned prior to departure is subject to tax by CaliforniaAfter departure, only income from California sources is subject to tax by CaliforniaNonresidents are generally not taxed by California on income from intangibles, such as dividends from stocks or interest from bonds or bank accounts. • California military servicemembers who leave California

The military person is domiciled in CA. He jointly owns a home in CA with his spouse but has been stationed in FL for the entire year per military orders. Spouse was a resident of CA.

I posted this on the General Chat as well. If there are any CA preparers using TRX Pro, please help I have a new client who is in the military and has moved to NC the last week of December. Here is the situation, he has been living in Florida for the last year, all income was from Florida. Spouse was a resident of CA. If I am understanding correctly, he is Domiciled in CA and considered a non-resident. CA form 540NR. Because the spouse is a resident of CA and CA is a community property state, one half of the taxpayers income is adjusted as a military pay adjustement correct? This is a little confusing and I am using TRX Pro and it doesn't appear the amounts are either flowing correctly or I have entered them incorrectly. I don't see one half of the military pay in column B of Sch CA line 7. Nor do I see the letters MPA beside column A. I do see the proper amounts in the other columns. What am I missing here? Working off of an input form is a PITA in this situation. When I hover over the adjustments box on line 7 of the input form it tells me generally an input here is not needed and if the person in the military is Domiciled in one of the other community property states then they are entitled/qualified for the adjustment and the proper MPA will be entered next to column A. Any help is appreciated.

I have a new client who is in the military and has moved to NC the last week of December. Here is the situation, he has been living in Florida for the last year, all income was from Florida. Spouse was a resident of CA. If I am understanding correctly, he is Domiciled in CA and considered a non-resident. CA form 540NR. Because the spouse is a resident of CA and CA is a community property state, one half of the taxpayers income is adjusted as a military pay adjustement correct? This is a little confusing and I am using TRX Pro and it doesn't appear the amounts are either flowing correctly or I have entered them incorrectly. I don't see one half of the military pay in column B of Sch CA line 7. Nor do I see the letters MPA beside column A. I do see the proper amounts in the other columns. What am I missing here? Working off of an input form is a PITA in this situation. When I hover over the adjustments box on line 7 of the input form it tells me generally an input here is not needed and if the person in the military is Domiciled in one of the other community property states then they are entitled/qualified for the adjustment and the proper MPA will be entered next to column A. Any help is appreciated.

I experienced the same problem with a CA return last evening. Support had me opt out of the MEF but blamed it on CA. There has been a few things with this program this year that are really beginning to bug me. Anyone else experiencing anything? I know support this year isn't very helpful and I think they must have hired some new folks. I asked last evening how to change the print order of the forms as I knew I did this last year and forgot how I did it.. A second level tech said you can't. Well.... you can. Under the advanced tab by the printer ICON is where you organize the print sets.

Mike, You hit it right on the head. After all the trouble support finally got the TaxExact working. However, all I see is the ability to create payroll ending period forms such as 940, 942 W-3, 1096. I cannot find how to create the W-2 or 1099 forms either. Not worth the time and effort that I put in to it. The support staff obviously does not know anything about payroll. I did explain what I wanted several times and still ended up with what I got. I guess when you think about it, completing 941. 940 and the other forms are definitely after the fact payroll. Big misconception on the sales end as well.

H & R fees usually are based on geographical area and are not the same in two places. The other companies seem to range as well. Here is what I know. My fees for individual returns are always less than any of the Corporate boys because mine are fair and resonable and do not include rip-off scams. On the other hand, fees for corp, estate;etc are something I don't compare as the service provided is not comparable. I understand the desire to be competative but if you give above the board service, the business will come. As a rule, the most expensive is not always the best and you don't have to be the cheapest to be the best at what you do or offer. You do have to determine what the market are you are in can withstand.