FreedomTaxed

Jack's right. For the risk, spend the money on having an IT guy make the duplication. Make sure they give you the original drive back; keep it as a catastrophic backup, but it'll soon be obsoleted as you keep making changes.

Well, the market has to be fully informed. Full information is delivered by IRS enforcement action. We're back to the IRS simply not doing its job. 90% of the tax returns that are filed in the USA, are filed electronically (by tax preparers running various programs, and by individuals running various programs). There's no reason that computers can't check ALL of these returns, and in fact all are checked to various degrees. The e-file rejection process proves that. The IRS receives 11 billion dollars to process about 230 million tax returns. That's $50 per return. Obviously such a system can't run on much Human interaction; that's far too little money per. But it's plenty of money to sift through about 200 million of those returns using algorithms. So I'd bet that if the IRS was forced to open up bidding on outsourcing the auditing arm, we'd see some efficiency show up... driven by fairly stiff fines on taxpayers and preparers that pay off the contractor. So we'd have the proper socio-economic motivation: Cheat on your taxes, or cheat on taxes for pay, and some profit-driven contractor will have you paying for his kids' braces... so you'd learn not to cheat on taxes again. Addendum: On that note, I agree about the letters the IRS is sending out about preparers which have a "high percentage of traits" for errors on the Schedule C. And the IRS needs to stop threatening and start issuing those $1000 and $5000 fines.

We use OpenOffice for general office applications, Chrome for the browser (although MSIE is still loaded and could be used), and VueMinder for our scheduler. All on Windows 7 Pro 64 machines, running workgrouped with a Windows Server 2012 Essentials machine (which is overkill). One of our experienced office-skilled people hates OO, but he's an Apple person anyway, so he's less to me than a worm in the dust. OK, I kid, I kid, but other than Mr Office Militant, our use of OO is perfectly fine, and you can't beat the price. I've been able to craft very usable spreadsheets and documents and labels. The only real trouble I've had was in performing a mailmerge to print out almost 3000 labels for a mailing campaign. That mailmerge was very frustrating since in using one of the Avery templates I wasn't able to line up the addresses on the labels professionally; each label was a tiny bit off so that by the bottom label, text was printing off the edge of the label. I fiddle-fixed it so that it barely got all the labels in place on each page. Dunno what the heck the problem was, but fine control of label placement to the 1/100th of the inch was available but didn't work correctly; hence, tweak tweak tweak tweak PRINNNNNNNT, thank god that's over.

We use custom fields in ATX. I've attached our current ATX2014 screenshots; the first is the Returns tab, and the second is the Accounts Receivable tab. I've removed the client and preparer info for privacy. Since all our PCs run the server/workstation version, everybody sees the same stuff (with differing permissions due to login), and everyone's PC was setup with the same custom fields. For the Client# field, we use the preparer initials and the year the return was prepared. We use that for previous years to keep track of which tax years are filed in which client appointment, drop-off or walk-in. So you can see how fairly simple this is, assuming people just do what they're told and do it consistently. Our preparers have to learn a few keywords for status and location and billing condition.

I don't mean to be pedantic, Pacun, but I can't agree that the starting point is to put a pointless educational load on the tax preparers. The market should be selecting these people out anyway, and those who aren't selected out, are then selected out by the IRS actually acting to enforce what the PTIN actually means. The PTIN implies that the IRS can disable it or revoke it, hence disable or revoke the tax preparer, hence suffice as enforcement. I guess what I'm trying to say is that if the IRS won't act against bad PTIN holders now, then why bother adding another layer of regulation that won't be enforced anyway? The IRS required a registration number, but almost nothing happens to you when you screw up. So the IRS wants to require an education base, but again, nothing will happen to you when you screw up. Prediction: Service for the clients will not improve; in fact, it's slightly likely to worsen, since added expenses will make preparers more desperate to make it up with "unreasonable" positions.

Honestly, why? Regulation isn't the problem with erring and fraudulent tax preparers. The problem is that the IRS is nowhere near where it needs to be in providing consequences to tax preparers. For example, PTINs should be put on hold if there are too many erring returns submitted under them; the PTIN hold could then be noted in the efile rejection process, hence alerting the ERO. Regulation as indicated by the RTRP program is the IRS model for what's supposed to happen. So we already know how 'effective' it will be. Clue: Telling a fraudulent tax preparer to take 15 hours of b.s. online courses just so he can keep filing his frauds, changes nothing except to provide yet another financial opportunity for yet another parasite (the trainers and certifiers) who feeds on the industry and taxpayers. The fraudster preparer will just slap down the $200 and take the courses and keep filing EIC and Sch.C/E, as well as outright identity thefts. The erring preparer may have a better idea, but he was always supposed to be kicked in the butt by his clients and the IRS anyway.

No. You need a mobile device that runs iOS or Android. You can plug your mobile device into this, however: https://squareup.com/stand We use a Square reader from an old smartphone from one of the owners. We setup the phone to use wifi only (hence no cost other that Square fees), and it works like a charm.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/137 Something to watch out for. The bill aims to empower the IRS to directly regulate tax preparers, which was the missing element behind the Registered Tax Return Preparer (RTRP) program. The text of the bill (which I can't find again) simply adds "and tax preparers" to relevant sections of existing Title 26 code. The bill seems sluggish so I have my doubts about it passing. But bad ideas have a way of persisting and then making their way into legislation, so be prepared for the IRS taking control of our profession. Then it'll be more and more requirements each couple of years, and higher and higher fees to comply with those requirements.

Thhhhhhppppbbbtt!! (my standard raspberry)

We finally gave every tax preparer two monitors this year, since we bought Dell XPS 8700 machines for everyone (because, well, CCH told us that Windows XP was out). The Dell PCs each came with a video card that has 3 ports, VGA, DVI and HDMI. Well, our existing Dell monitors all had VGA and DVI inputs. And I had spare DVI cables laying around.

We have an IRS office less than 10 miles away. I find myself sending clients there more and more. There's a service crew there and it's good to know that our clients have the ability to talk directly to an IRS agent, face to face, with his computer system right there at his hands.

SaraEA, I was more worried about the dates of coverage for which we were allegedly on the hook for confirming. If that's not expected this year, and a 1095 will positively show up for all insured people next year, then everything seems fine.

"This means that new taxpayer protections against identity theft will be delayed." This shouldn't change our job in the slightest. We use the identity PIN when required. Other than that, if there's identity fraud, then we just make a paper mailing and let the IRS Fresno figure it out. All it takes is time.

It's not the 1095-A that worries me. It's the employer stuff. http://www.accountingtoday.com/news/irs-watch/obamacare-navigate-tax-filing-headache-73328-1.html "One issue with the mandate is that workers won’t get statements from employers that say whether their insurance met the law’s requirements for minimum coverage. The IRS delayed that requirement until the 2016 tax-filing year, and the lack of information will limit the government’s ability to enforce the law." If the employer isn't properly informing their employees, then how are we tax preparers supposed to properly perform due diligence for this stuff? Our current solution is to have the client fill out something like the IRS Form 13614-C, which this year contains the healthcare disclosure, and then we have them sign the usual "hereby sworn to be true" blah blah terms and conditions at the bottom.

We don't charge. Efiling saves us time. And paper filing is what we were saving the client from doing in the first place, hence our work fee. So you end up paying the same regardless of how we file you. Nobody's complained about that yet.

Sorry, I'm not believing that one. The news item I have, notes that people doing a paper filing, and those subject to review, might have 1 week added delay in processing their refund... "or more" according to IRS Director John Koskinen. Not a big deal.

n) I'll just drop off my taxes on April 15th and they'll get done that day, right? n+1) {in the middle of tax season} I need you to file my last 6 years of taxes. Can you do that in a couple of hours? I've gotta get to Florida tomorrow. n+2) I need my {current year minus 8-12 years} taxes. Just pull me a copy, including all my W-2s and 1099s. n+3) I know it's a capital gain, but there must be some way you can get me out of paying taxes on it. I swear, I feel like socking these people right in the nose when they pull this crap on us.

Trying to go paperless is a big battle. As a manager and not an owner, I can't implement all that I'd like to. Trying to implement an appointment scheduler in software was a real agony; one of the owners is "spastic" on the computer mouse and keeps screwing things up in the program. But we can't go back to a paper schedule... it's far too slow, or too inflexible, and of course you can't search it in anything less than "way too long" time. I suspect there's this generational thing going on, and until that generation finally dies off and lets us complete the computerization paradigm, it just can't be done.

Clients already know we have soda and coffee. And sadly, we have a history over several years of being "creative" with Schedules C and E. Changing the creative culture is very difficult; I dearly wish the IRS would make good on its threat to fine preparers $1000 for unreasonable positions and $5000 for reckless positions. That way, the taxpayers would stop expecting us to lie for them. Oops, did I use the L-word? Sorry, I meant to say "be creative for them".

Jackson Hewitt's starting to worry me. We might have to change our competitive direction slightly. Among other things, JH is now offering a refund anticipation loan (as a $200 advance, minimum refund of $1000 required). We can't afford to take that sort of risk, but still....

More lunacy. If the tax code is that difficult, then fix it, much like others have said. And as importantly, if every citizen can prepare their own taxes anyway, without being certified to do so, then it logically stands that you can do that same work for pay under the same lack of certification. After all, the taxpayer's dependency creates a natural due diligence. In fact, the due diligence is factual... the IRS still holds the taxpayer liable for the outcome of the filing, regardless of the position of the preparer. So controls on the preparer naturally exist. The concept of limited government is being lost in all of this. Shame on us if we let this happen.

I've looked into this more closely. One of our tax preparers got a letter like this. A problem has arisen where this letter isn't being taken seriously, but from all the news items, I'd say that the $1000 fine per incident is now a serious risk. Times like this, the manager's hat is heavy.

Reviewing an entire year of tax returns is charge $A. Then the amendment is $B. I find it troubling that you claim that 60 = 3A + B, since it implied rather frightfully small values of A and B. I can understand applying a discount. We discount filings for retirees and students, and then apply another discount if those are low-income retirees and students. But in your case, Rita, I'd have charged 3x$50 + $50 (low-income retiree without Sch.C, E or F or K-1), hence $200 for all of that. One of our senior tax preparers (a new hire; don't ask) insists that reviewing tax returns for free is one of those things you do to build and maintain your client base. Myself, I take the tack that "nobody works for free" and we have to keep the lights on, the furnace running, etc. Happy holidays.

Two primary pieces of information. Suggestions: 1. If the taxpayer can't or won't complete his tax filing in TurboTax, then he's buying your service; he needs you, and your work is for sale. If you do work for free instead, that's nice... just admit it. You may feel this is a social responsibility in this case. 2. If you cannot perform due diligence on the tax return, then refuse to do the work. Due diligence implies a certain minimum of original documents must be supplied to you. You might wish to have the taxpayer to print out his worksheets and then sign them for your files.

The tax-prep industry is one of the most profitable in the nation right now. According to the propaganda gulping that I laughably call "my research" into this sort of thing, practices can sell for 100% to 125% of their yearly revenue. Often, that's just too large a sale amount; for ourselves, at our peak, that would have been $500K to $650K. Is HRB et al really willing to throw down 100% to 125% of revenue just to buy you out? Practice buyouts are often spaced out over time. 4 years seems common. (And it seems like the only way to sell the business to the employees. People who work clerk or part-year positions are notoriously decapitalized in my area.)