Gail in Virginia

Interesting article excerpted from The New York Times in The Week about where college tuition money is going and why colleges need to raise tuition so much points to the increase in the number of administrators. From 1993 to 2009, the number of administrators at colleges increased by 60 per cent. At California Polytechnic University, the total number of administrators grew from 3,800 to 12,183 over three decades - a 221 per cent increase. The article does not mention how much other areas grew - student body, number of professors, etc. The article also points out that some administrators are making six- and even seven- figure salaries now. From the attitude expressed towards those administrators in your posts, you are not getting your money's worth.

I thought that it was a little nutty myself.

But if the charge is based not on the amount of refund, but the amount of EIC claimed regardless of whether that results in a refund, could that not be a fee based on risk assumed? After all, with the due diligence requirements it seems to me that EITC is one of the riskier areas of tax practice and the more EITC claimed, the larger the risk of sizable penalties. This is not my pricing model, but it makes sense to me in a way.

As long as it is after April 15, and we know that you will eventually get the forum back up for us, we will be fine. As someone mentioned, we might have withdrawal symptoms, but all will be well once we get our next "fix."

Our pricing model is almost exactly the same as Tom's, right down to the price that our returns start at. We do offer children's returns at about half the price of what we would charge if the return did not come in with the parent. I do that mainly to encourage them to let us file the child's return so we can be sure they don't claim themselves.

I am still laughing at the "actively participates" part of Pacun's post.

Maybe a dumb suggestion - but you do have the taxpayer's date of birth in correctly so the program knows that he is over 59 1/2?

I always wonder when someone says they have never been audited exactly what they mean by that. I have never had a tax return that I prepared "audited" I'm the sense that I had face to face contact with a representative of the IRS. I gave had correspondence audits for various reasons that required me to submit copies of documents used, or teach some one at the IRS how to properly follow regulations. And from what I understand, a full blown face to face audit does not mean the preparer has done anything wrong necessarily. It might mean the taxpayer gave them bad information for whatever reason, to it might just mean that they got lucky. So I never have understood thus tendency to brag about never being audited. Maybe they have never done a complex return?

But do you have an advertising deal with the phone company?

Apparently, the depreciable assets were part of the gift and should have been included in the 1.3 million value at their current adjusted basis (I think.) Which would make their basis in the hands of the donees the same as the basis was in the hands of the donor, and no gain or loss would be recognized on the transfer. But no guarantee is given with the answer - it is APRIL the 12TH!

Terry, I read the post completely differently. I think what Steven was saying was that, after deducting scholarships and grants, the amount of tuition and fees was STILL $35,133. The 1099Q shows $9,300 which would reduce the amount paid out of non-scholarship, non-tax deferred funds to $25,833. Which would leave plenty of expenses for AOC.

I keep a can of Lysol and a large bottle of hand sanitizer at my desk at all times. The way my clients over-share sometimes seem communicable.

I will file returns as far back as a client can give me information to file. As far as e-filing prior years, none of us can e-file more than the current year and the two prior years if I am not mistaken because that is all the IRS is set up to accept. And as far as the client never having heard from the IRS - REALLY? Even if it was just computer generated letters that were never followed up on, I bet the letters were sent. Almost always, when the IRS grabs a refund from the current year for past due taxes, my clients have never been notified that they had past due taxes. This is the first they heard of it. Right. I know the post office occasionally loses mail, and surely the IRS occasionally misses one of these letters, BUT my money is on selective memory on the part of the client.

Sounds like it was never placed in service as rental property because he changed his mind before he made any effort to rent the property. As far as whether it is long or short term, I would say that depends on how fast he is able to sell the property. It would be a capital gain in any event.

ROFL

Did he have any wages paid? He might qualify for DPAD also.

Thanks, all! Turns out she did go to MO just to administer a test so they really do need to file as NR and pay the tax. Fortunately, VA is giving them credit for everything they paid in MO so it really doesn't hurt them except to pay me to do an extra state return. I can live with that.

I have a client who was a resident of VA for the entire year. At no time did they work IN Missouri. However, they were hired by a Missouri company to provide services which were performed in VA for which they received a W2. The W2 shows the entire amount of income as being both VA source and MO source income with taxes withheld for both states. When I complete the MO NR tax return, they are paying MO taxes on that income. Is that correct? According to the instructions, a non-resident with MO income of $600 or more would have a liability but this just doesn't seem like it should be considered MO source income since my client was never in MO. Since it was reported on the W2 that way, however, and tax was withheld I don't see much choice. Any opinions for what I should do? I can take the credit for tax paid in another state on the VA return, and will, if MO is going to keep most of the tax withheld like it is looking.

I totally agree with jasdlm. I hope you will come back, but whether or not you do, I wish you well.

I don't believe the sale information on the K-1 is reported to IRS - it is part of the supplemental statements. I have been reporting them using the 1099B information, marking the k-1 final, and following the instructions ProSeries included in the disposition section of the k-1 as follows: Note: If this is a full or partial disposition of a publicly traded partnership (PTP) or master limited partnership (MLP) that was reported to you on a Form 1099-B, enter a sales price of zero on line 5 and a basis of zero on line 7 below. Enter the 1099B transaction on Schedule D, checking the appropriate "Reported on 1099-B" box A or B.

But even though I don't want or need cookies, it is always nice to be appreciated and to know that SOME of our clients actually see us as people who are working as hard as we can for them!

I would ask some more questions. Did the mother pay taxes each year, but leave the royalties with the working capital of the oil well? And her death did not trigger income, but a payout? Or is this income to her accrued prior to her death but not paid until after her death? Maybe you have answers, and maybe it is all income for this year, but is it income for her final return or for the fiduciary return? Does this mean there is a capital investment that the estate can sell that would maybe result in a capital loss to offset the income? If somebody left me oil royalties, I would smile while I paid the taxes.

You are my hero, Rita! I have never had enough nerve to tell someone that, but I have often thought it! I love it!

Now I read it that the FAM users would get a discount TO $179 for the enhanced features. No telling what everyone else will pay for the features. Obviously, the release was not very clear.