Christian

ATX Supreme Guru is of course correct. The computer had 512 mb and at some point I added an upgrade to 1056 mb or 1 gb. Holiday travel and obnoxious relations mixed my bytes. Alas ! I believe I am right in that the machine cannot use Windows 7 having maxed out it's ram memory.

Thanks for the input guys. It looks as if I may have bought a faster machine which I will not need this coming year. It was not terribly expensive and I can use it for other matters until such time as I may need it. An older machine using Windows XP I have cannot use Windows 7 since it's maximum ram is some 1056 GB so it will need to be retired to the glue factory.

I have downloaded the 2013 1040 program from the ATX website my cds not yet having arrived. Out of curiosity I downloaded it to my older machiine which has an AMD 1.4 Ghz processor although i purchased a faster model for this coming tax year. To my astonishment it downloaded the program and although slow it functions fairly well. It is actually faster than the 2012 version which is loaded on this machine. As my client base is not huge loading a given return a bit slow does not present a problem. I do not fully understand this as we have been advised by ATX to upgrade our hardware. Anyone have any ideas ?

Here in southern Virginia our hams are salt cured and require boiling before cooking. But, they surely are gooooooood !

Virginia has a federal exchange so no availability of medicaid. In looking over the replies I would posit that since the adult daughter has no filing requirement the parents need pay no penalty for her not having health coverage. On the other hand they may elect to cover her as she would receive a credit equal to 80% of her premium.

After looking over the client list I find most of the folks I serve have acceptable health insurance. However, one case in particular has me scratching my head. I have a retired couple who claim an adult daughter and her two minor children as dependents. The children are covered under a federal program but their mother has no coverage. She likewise has no filing requirement. Does this make her father and mother responsible for health insurance on her or does the fact she does not meet the filing requirement relieve her of the need for having it ? Any thoughts would be appreciated.

The Affordable Care Act was intended to provide a tax credit to subsidize private health insurance for Americans with too much income to qualify for Medicaid but no health insurance from their jobs. The law says they can qualify if they buy that insurance through an insurance exchange established by the state. The law does not say that the government can give tax credits to people who get their insurance on federal exchanges (assuming that people can get computer access to the federal exchanges in the first place). But 36 states have decided not to operate their own exchanges. Whether in malice or laziness or incompetence, those states decided to let Uncle Sam build their exchanges. The administration's position is that it was an accident, a mere oversight, easily corrected by the Internal Revenue Service in its regulations concerning the tax credit. Gleeful critics of Obamacare, however, say that it was an intentional oversight, aimed at giving the reluctant states an incentive to start their own exchanges. They have filed suits in Indiana, Oklahoma, Virginia, and the District of Columbia. Opponents of Obamacare think they have found the perfect chain shot to de-mast the law. If the government can't give the subsidies, it probably can't enforce the mandate for individuals to have health insurance. Neutral observers, if there be any, probably could agree that the Democratic majority that passed the law intended to give a subsidy to everyone who qualifies. But they would also agree that the IRS can't change a law by writing a rule that contradicts it. They would conclude that the only way out is for Congress to amend the Affordable Care Act.

I don't have any clients who want to deny themselves a tax credit. Rather the reverse.

A recent article I just read indicates what may be a critcal flaw in the ACA. In computing credits for those entitled the law was written indicating only those buying insurance through the STATE exchange would be receiving them. Apparently the drafters did not forsee the establishment of FEDERAL exchanges believing the punitive measures in the law were sufficient to force all states to set up an exchange. The Supreme Court killled this requirement so now they are scrambling to draft an IRS regulation to effect the credits on the federal exchanges. This is being challenged in federal court as the law clearly states STATE exchanges and says nothing about a FEDERAL exchange. I ordinarily would not take note of this but it was in the Barron's issue for this week.

Like all of you I have been watching the rollout of Obamacare. In Virginia we did not elect to set up a state exchange. This kept an expansion of Medicaid in our state from occurring. This being so is it y'all's understanding that low income folks then qualify for credits on the purchase of insurance on the federal exchange?

I recently tried to access their tv site only to receive a notice that I was being redirected. Nothing subsequently happened so I switched browsers with the same result. Any of you have any info on this ? It may be the site is down post season.

I've been setting up my hardware for the coming season and note ATX has advised a shipping date sometime in November. Does anyone know a more specific date?

In checking the new hardware requirements for ATX 2013 I note the CPU speed at 2.8Ghz. Alas my machine is 2.33Ghz but exceeds all the other hardware requirements. I think it will likely run a bit slow but otherwise will be ok. Any tech gurus out there wo can comment on this ?

I am sure they love Governor Christie in New Jersey. A breath of fresh air in a fish factory. For myself, I was astonished that one of our Republican governors would behave as he has. However, I believe we made the correct choice on Obamacare. I am already taxed quite enough to furnish federal goodies to the oppressed. It will likely bring in some additional business for me to pay taxes on to help fund another federal program sure to be chock a block with fraud and abuse.

Yes Governor McDonald must have taken a few lessons from some of our sanctimonious Yankee brethren in Illinois, New Jersey, and New York to name just a few.

Virginia did not agree to set up an exchange likely fearing the feds would cut off support after a few years. I am wondering if a non-filer files will he then be able to receive the credits here as Virginia apparently did not go along with the expansion of Medicaid ?

Thanks for all of your responses.

A client has a Simple IRA account to which he has contributed each year. Upon turning 70 1/2 this year he received his first MRD. As he plans to continue in the side business he operates he questioned his fiduciary about continuing to contribute each year as long as he operated his business. They advised that yes he could contribute each year even though he had now begun receiving a MRD each year as long as he was still in business. I am going to check this but would like to know if any of you have encountered this situation and if so what your determination was.

A client passed on and apparently had set up some form of trust into which all her assets will be placed. Two sons were named in her will as trustees to effect her will. They were not required to be appointed by our local circuit court and have no court certified document as a result having instead one stating their appointment to her trust as co-trustees. As she will receive a refund from the IRS I am attaching a copy of this to her Form 1310 for both brothers. Do y'all feel this will meet the requirements so the refund will be processed ? This is one of those new wrinkles I am forever encountering.

Gee. I was unaware H&R Block would offer to buy a practice out. I'll have to keep that in mind when i pull the plug. With my luck it would likely be a posthumous purchase.

ATX is still advertising their RTRP exam study program. You have to wonder with whom are RTRPs registered. An agency which no longer recognizes the certification ?

That's right it is my service that brings them back. However, the certificate reinforces their confidence in my abilities and confirms them in their choice of me as their tax guy.

That is of course true. However, it was an IRS sanctioned exam and that is what I want them to know. It is not false to say " I passed the IRS exam". The test cost me a not inconsiderable amount of money and with no chance of any refund from the IRS I am going to darn well derive a benefit from my efforts.

I let clients know I passed the required testing and display my certificate in my office. I really do not expect the Service to be able to resurrect the program. I think they will lose on appeal and have virtually no chance of getting authority for it out of a Republican House of Representatives especially with all the trouble they are currently in.

I wonder what happened to the registered practitioner listing they were going to set up ? The court gave that the boot as well I guess.