easytax

PDFill.com $20.00 program that does so much. Encrypt, rename, fill-in, change to multiple doc's, a lot of things I do not use and do not know but they are there. I really like that I can give a client a password and should they forget or call me to un-lock ????? I can have then send the email PDF back and use my separate password --- instead of having to remember what I told them, theirs was. It is a small thing but when looking back (years, etc.) I only need to have my "main" password and not their individual one (did Imention choice of 40 or 128 encryption). Visit PDFill.com and review yourself : Create, Fill, Edit, Delete and Submit PDF Form Fields Type, Draw, Comment, Sign and Scan PDF Documents PDF Ink or PDF Annotator on Table PC Open, View, Edit and Save PDF files without Adobe Acrobat Good tax season and a GREAT Thanksgiving and Christmas.

I am looking at the last line of the paragraph (pg. 1 1095-B instructions where is does state that the "insurance issuers and carriers don't report coverage under ..." as you say BUT goes onto say that "These types of coverage are reported by the government sponsors of these programs" which I take it to mean either the agency (Medicare is the sponsor but -- I believe --basically they "farm out" the "INSURANCE" end) or whomever is sponsoring --- will/should send the 1095-B . On page 2 second column; jus under #7 "In general, the government agency sponsoring the program will file Form 1095-B. The State agency that administers a Medicaid or CHIP program will file Form 1095-B for coverage under those programs." I originally agree WHOLEHEARTEDLY that Medicare and such did not get 1095's but this leads me to believe they do. As I tend to at times "over read" and understand wording; I may still be incorrect but do believe 1095's will be sent by someone for these type people (Medicare, Medicaid, etc.). An example is in these same instructions ----- under "WHO MUST FILE" it starts off "Every person that provides minimum essential coverage to an individual .." --- while -- specifically "PERSONS" do NOT provide -- as stated --- the company, entity, etc. provides --- and at times ---- this is not a "PERSON". Probably why they no longer allow us to use the IRS publications as "proof" when we "discuss" things with them and make us use cites, etc. from the REAL code IRS pubs/instructions are getting muddier and muddier as time goes along (my opinion, of course). Looking forward to being wrong incorrect (after all -- as a GUY, can I EVER be really wrong ). Have fun and THANKS for response -- please keep them coming!

Thanks KC! I stand corrected. It seems from instructions from the links KC gave that ALL people will be getting a 1095 (A,B,C) of some sort INCLUDING Medicare and Medicaid, etc.. Everyone will need one of these forms to properly complete their tax returns or have to "pay" the penalty. If someone disagrees or reads the instructions differently, PLEASE share.

From one question so many off-shoots happen //// shows a decent response and respect for discussion! As an aside: cpaacadamey.org has a number of free "webinars" on sales tax that are good learning experiences (yes, they try to sell you on the presenting companies services but you do NOT Have To buy). One such is here: http://www.cpaacademy.org/webinars/a0DC000000nevV7MAI . Given that sales tax can be levied even down to the city, county, ANY municipal section -- it is no wonder that many companies take the "easy way" out --- and even then can be incorrect (ie. example PA has a 6% and 7% sales tax depending on where you buy things -- so which one do you collect??? even the government has argued on place of sale, address of buyer, address of seller, etc.) Agreed --- HOWEVER -- the bottom line here is --- they do not offer anyway other than receiving the CD to buy the program ---- HENCE -- your choice buy what is offered - or do not. Therefore the sales tax is part f the equation and REQUIRED from this type of sale. The fact that it would be nicer for us (INCLUDE Me) to not get the CD and do all by download is not revalent as it is not one of CCH's offerings. THANKFULLY : As my mind at times is DEAD (not even a good business mind) and if this forum has helped "get-er-rite"; so asking what may seem like a "dumb" question is appreciated -- so ALL new ones (us semi-old ones too) are given leeway and consideration... from all during most times and when not, we even grow knowledge then --- as to who to listen to and NOT listen too --- follow and think on the ones helping /// let the others to dust ... Agreed, if new, you do not know who to listen too or "worry about" --- so they have to learn from and about us. With that said --- MY BELIEF here /// a thicker skin can be developed and becoming a "duck" that sheds the excess water is a good trait to learn; even here. BESIDES: like the medical beliefs -- try this for a decade and then we will tell you we are wrong and go back to the original --- dirt is good but because many keep their kids safe (and clean) they do not build up any immune system whereas if they played in dirt and were exposed --- they build that immunity --- the same can be said to exposure to what might be construed as "snarky" and short, mean answers where it may simply be the way that person comes across --- we can all still learn from that person --- even if it is NOT to be bothered in the future and take it with a LARGE grain of salt. As another aside ---- if everything were straight forward; we would all be out of business --- where as the government makes money in confusion, so do we --- if people could follow the tax laws because they were straight forward --- then we would NOT be needed.. ----- thread off to another "off shoot". Have a GREAT Halloween.

Could this be "Teddy" as a baby? For complete MSN.com article: "21 Animals You Rarely See As Babies" http://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/pets/21-animals-you-rarely-see-as-babies/ss-AAfxDwT?ocid=U147DHP#image=1

Agreed, Medicare has no 1095's (currently) --- but what about Medicaid and is there anything for the small business --- with all the changes and --"lets wait till next year" from congress, etc. --- I BELIEVE just the bigger than 50 employee businesses, etc. are required to give 1095's. BUT AGAIN, what about smaller --- I am brain dead, so be gentle with your answers on this --- Thanks.

This excerpt is from an ATX informational notice and although pertaining from BUSINESS, it seems to reflect to all individual returns too. As I read it, it means that any Social Security number that has need of / requires an IP pin whether as primary, secondary, dependent, etc. --- that the IP Pin will be required to be listed on the return when filed. Your comments and confirmation or disagreement of my understanding would be appreciated. EXCERPT: IP PIN Business Rules. The IRS has announced that there are new Modernized e-File (MeF) 1040 business rules related to the Identity Protection PIN (TAXDAY, 2015/10/05, I.4). Beginning January 1, 2016, the IRS will require the use of Identity Protection PINs for all Social Security Numbers (SSNs) with an IP PIN requirement, regardless of whether the SSN is entered for a primary, spouse or dependent/qualifying individual.

An additional alternative ..

Will was "standard" so to speak. Attorney just "always did it that way" supposedly to lower inheritance tax -- which would have done that BUT never looked or considered the income tax implications. Just an FYI -- and I am NOT an attorney and NOT practicing law ---- the executrix did decline after we talked. I do not believe (but do not know for sure either) that the "fee" was re-added to the estate inheritance tax --- so the attorney did not file with that amount included, etc.. Several other issues but the executrix just wanted it to be done --- so no follow up, just closure. She was happy and I was happy for her too. She had the documents and if questioned, it all would fall back on the attorney.

Agree with all said above. Just a note on the executor fees (from a personal experience): An attorney insisted that the estate pay an executor fee of over $50,000 to one of my clients (sole beneficiary). Since she was a direct descendent -- her inheritance tax would have been just 4.5% in this case vs. a 35% income tax, etc. on the $50,000. Look at things through different lenses and from YOUR expertise ---- attorneys do not always know.

Given ATX is not supplying as much reference material (without extra cost) as it has in previous years I share this information. Tax Book http://www.thetaxbook.com/index.asp has been given good reports on this forum many times. Using that, I just finalized my order with "Gabriel" at 866-919-5277 ext. 153 . Currently a 20% discount is offered "E20B" on many products. Give Gabriel a call (if he can put up with me -- he is golden and happy to help). Just wanted to share. Good Season, Ed

Interesting enough a basically NEW decision or definition from the U.S. Department of Labor will eventually be effecting the IRS looking at employee vs. independent contractor which will also effect home workers, etc.. Given that many state Dept. of Labor are sharing when/if they find misclassifications with the IRS, the IRS may (lack of funds may hamper this) go after various entities (including the single tax payer, etc.) who does not send in their "fair share" of employment taxes. Just food for thought --- here is the PDF --: Independent Contractor vs Employee DOL_IC_Guidance 071515.pdf NOTE: In PA there was Act 72 of 2011 about this and the state L&I dept. has starting being aggressive about IC or employee. Although when enacted meant to be just for construction industry, this is starting to "bloom" into many other areas. Given most states are looking for all the money they can get --- it will grow (IMHO).

Monitors: If this should be in the "private" member area, please move. Thanks again, Ed. The majority of my clients are "word-of-mouth" and NO walk-ins with very limited drop off (NO prep while waiting). Communication is done via telephone and internet. Given that, I have on my web site several documents explaining what I will do, how it is done and preliminary details on what is required by a "good" client so a GREAT preparer can assist them. Last year I was able to "turn-away" several EIC questionables' by explaining my requirements as to documentation. With that in mind, I have developed an "EIC" informational form (attached as a PDF file) to help cut-the-time for those who might be "shopping" EIC people. I have no wish to increase EIC clients and will not (of course as we all will not) play games to get the client better EIC or any undeserved money. If you have a few minutes and the inclination, please review and critic the attached PDF and share if there needs to be more detail, less detail or any other suggestions. I want to assist those who have a true need and also want to protect myself. A few EIC fines would definitely hurt my practice and I would rather have less but better clients who want to be legal. Thanks for reading. Here is the PDF: Earned Income Credit Documents for filing 091615.pdf

Not at present. At one time when asset manager was a full part of ATX all that was there (full history, future years, etc.). Then they "improved" things and asset manager came separately. Now that they are eliminating asset manager maybe they will bring that part back into the normal ATX program.

Agree with rfassett . One of my clients won a new vehicle a few years ago and received 1099 on basically "suggested retail". We simply checked "other" dealers for FMV typically paid and were able to show actual value several thousand lower than 1099 on which we based the tax. No problems from IRS and we simply explained in writing our basis (of course, it was a simpler and fairer time back then).

Also NOT familiar here but a question for Vityaba Is not there two separate and distant occurrences here (basically from your " Amount realized on a recourse debt." shared above. The S corp is a separate entity (even if owner, etc.) is separately liable; therefore would not the S corp gain/loss be just the difference from adj. basis and the "sell" price? Whereas the "personally responsible" owner would be a different calculation?

From an article on MSN today of "jobs that will be extinct by 2030"; there was a screen shot here (BUT -- it has disappeared) it was slide 6. Here is the URL for full article: http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/careersandeducation/8-jobs-that-will-go-extinct-by-2030/ss-BBlImkg?ocid=U147DHP#image=1

Possibly "suggest" that your client have the HRA administrator give a written guarantee that they are covered without penalty and that the HRA administrator is willing to "cover/pay" the $100 a day penalty if they are wrong. My thoughts are that they will find a way to walk-a-way from their comment. AND --- if not, maybe they will have a way to advise all of us that this is possible.

Used one but do not believe in the other (personal choice as some might help). HOWEVER --- here are two suggestions for alleviating some of the "stress" one might face at tax time: Have a GREAT season, when we get there.

Understood and THANKS. Do you have a cert. for when/if these recommendations are approved?

As I am NOT fully up on this ---- Rational seems correct BUT if Gran took 2015 RMD - all is well /// if gram did not, since it is inherited, would the ben not have to take the 2015 RMD or be subject to the 50% penalty ------- or possible would the RMD for 2015 be subject and required to grams estate and the estate might be subject to the RMD 50% penalty for the RMD not taken for 2015?

Eric, Thanks that helped a lot. The chart in your article has apparently been taken from IRS Pub-519 and seems correct. By my reading in this circumstance, everything "hangs" on "SOURCE INCOME". Basically since your person was not ever in US and did all work at his place, etc. the income was NOT US Source income and can be deemed untaxable to the vendor. All that seems needed is the protection of the completed W-8BEN as KC stated above. Appreciate your finding the article. Should the Source Income have been from US, then your university might have been on-the-hook for the tax if not paid but by (my reading) since it is NOT US SOURCE income, then they will not have any tax liability (in this case) and your off shore vendor will not need to file, etc.

Just received an email form ATX --- basically selling but also reinforcing decisions. ATX must be taking a page from our government (note - not really political, just factual for both parties, etc.). Being a firm ATX user (suits my needs the best and with my rose covered glasses, I do really believe ATX is trying) --- just funny how EVERYTHING gets "splined" all the time. Notice that ATX mentions a marked improvement, etc. -- when you mess up as badly as they did in 2012 and regroup - it is amazing how BIG the satisfaction can increase. The solutions and software that you choose to partner with can make all the difference between your firm’s success or failure. With ATX, you can rest assured that you’ve made the best decision for your business. ATX offers the best value combination of pricing and product featuresComprehensive line-by-line research tools keep you up to date with the latest tax law developmentsATX users experienced a 90% satisfaction rating increase between 2013 and 201413 out of 4 ATX tax preparers would recommend ATX as the best solution for new practitioners2

KC, I am asking this as I would like to understand and probably will never have a need to use --- but would still like to fully understand and pars of your reply seem to go along with instructions while the last part seems contrary to a previous part, so clarification would be appreciated. Thanks in advance (again - you always have good guidance -- Thank You)! My question is that should the out-of-USA person NOT file a tax return (which they probably will not) and the IRS want to be persnickety; could the IRS not bill the university (in this case) for the tax due? The out-of-USA person is liable for USA tax (as I read the instructions) unless their country has a treaty, etc. and the tax is exempt or lower under that treaty. Yes, the W-8BEN allows either a lower rate or if the US Entity wants to gamble, a complete zero withholding BUT with the US Entity expecting the tax to be paid or filed, etc. If it is not, then the US Entity is on-the-hook so to speak. In Eric's case the W-9 is sufficient as the IRS knows where he is, etc. (thank you NSA) and could get to him rather easily should they desire -- it is another matter with someone NOT in the USA (either physically or by any business, other than transmitting information and ideas, etc.). The instructions do state (as you posted earlier --- Compensation for, or in expectation of, services performed; Substitute payments in a securities lending transaction; or Other fixed or determinable annual or periodical gains, profits, or income. --- and the out-of-USA person is rendering services and receiving compensation for those services from a USA based entity.