Jump to content
ATX Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


About Edsel

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • State

Recent Profile Visitors

1,333 profile views
  1. Edsel

    Multiple names, one member log in

    Buh bye Edsel, too.
  2. Edsel

    Multiple names, one member log in

    First forum of this kind where I've found this to be true. A good idea, too - keeps from needless proliferation of names. Helpful post - hope others read it. "LaVergne" may die a premature death...
  3. Moderator note - first 5 posts here were moved from another topic that was being derailed. Rita, LaVergne is simply Edsel on a client's computer. In order to post, you have to register, and the IP address of the computer in use will not allow a duplication of another name. Apologize if you were misled, there was no attempt to "hide" my identity. I think you know I would not hide behind a tree to post, even for unpopular subjects. The client's computer is in LaVergne, Tennessee. My engagement at this client will last until January when a full-time person will take over. Thus posts from "LaVergne" will be few and not last very long.
  4. Edsel

    State Tax Aggression

    This is not the first time Mr. Golar has deemed me to be unprofessional. The reason state taxes have such a personal appeal is because I have had two government contractors with a requirement to file in every state where they have a contract. Not only that, but one of them was an S corp, meaning I had to prepare personal returns in those states as well. Although not everyone has had the same experience, I have filed probably 25 different states (without counting), some 15 in one year for one customer alone. Additionally, Tennessee is a long and narrow state, thus we are never far away from one of our 8 contiguous states, all of whom have state taxes. I have also been accused of posting political issues (on a few occasions correctly). The issue of state taxes might be considered by some to be political if you believe higher taxes support more government services and social progress. That was not the intent of the post. but I obviously do believe a super institutional structure attaching to a taxing authority does result in a capricious and self-centered administration.
  5. Edsel

    OT: heart valve surgery

    The sobering thought that comes when we hear of someone having a difficult operation is that it reminds us of our own mortality. All respondents have wished you well, and it goes without saying that I do as well. Remember that you (the patient) is more accurately diagnostic than your doctors, and don't hesitate to remind them when their assumptions are going awry. Although I'm hopeful you are receiving the best possible care, the medical system has various ways for things to fall through the cracks, and have isolated themselves from the fallout. In many ways, even though your doctors are more knowledgeable, you are your own best resource.
  6. Edsel

    State Tax Aggression

    I've posted something like this before, and received a resounding echo of [crickets] and a few frowny emoticons. Being unpopular never seems to derail me, so I'll try again: Criteria for the below includes states where I have had experience, states with no experience but reputation from other preparers, tax rates, other non-objective stuff... WORST 5 STATES: New Jersey (administratively bad & charges $300 if you pay by check) Rhode Island (reportedly worse than "Taxachusetts", who miraculously is not on my list) California (huge superstructure and the worst rates) Illinois (business hostile and intentionally slow) Minnesota (high rates for a midwestern state and very, very aggressive. Can find you on the moon.) BEST 5 STATES: Nevada (business friendly, no personal or corporate tax) Alaska (low tax, no personal, and no superstructure taxing authority) Wyoming (no personal, and efficient) New Hampshire (no general personal or general sales tax) Montana (no sales tax, friendly to business and individuals) The low (or nonexistent) taxes in the best 5 are not by themselves the only seeming criteria. When a state cannot collect huge amounts of tax, the state cannot set up an oppressive and irresponsive or non-caring superstructure.
  7. In addition to the ridiculously-defined circumstances presented by Black Bart, there are an abundance of cross-references to other regs, such as: a part-time exchange student from Bora-Bora who designs software [described in reg 1.2637-4(i)(6)]during the week and picks fruit on weekends is an HB-1 non-resident alien [described in reg 1.934-18(viii)(12)(a)] who also sweeps out the premises of a non-profit organization [see also reg 1.436-7(xii)(2)(j)(iii)] nights for amounts which vary according to the phases of the moon. The amount of his earnings subject to {whatever} is... They assume we can open 15 windows just to research the question, which may have been as simple as: "Are unemployment benefits taxable?"
  8. Edsel

    State Tax Aggression

    Sounds like maybe I am not paranoid. The CT example by Sara was especially bad, since it appears this is not an error, but a deliberate action to blindside thousands of people. Like Bart's Kansas City people, Tennessee bills people all the time for fictitious taxes and penalties. Most of the time the notices don't even have an explanation. And curious enough, the amounts are nearly always under $100, meaning there is overwhelming reason for a taxpayer to simply write a check rather than to pay me to straighten out the mess. Referring to my original question: I wonder if a taxpayer simply pays them, will they be more than likely to receive another such fictitious bill? Or if they engage me to resist, will they be less likely to be bullied by the state next time around? I could conclude that Tennessee is tracking the responses, but I might be giving them too much credit.
  9. Edsel

    State Tax Aggression

    I encounter a few states in my practice - many of us do. I've noticed an increasing trend of states to assess taxes and penalties in error. These "errors" are never in favor of the taxpayer and are extremely biased in favor of the states. So much bias that I have to wonder whether these "errors" are deliberate. I may be having a case of my legendary paranoia against taxing authorities, but my best guess is most of us have encountered these "errors" and agree that they are rarely, if ever, in favor of the taxpayer. If these are deliberate, one possible supposition is that taxpayers will just pay the assessments in fear of further interface with state government. And in fact, many taxpayers will do exactly that because Taxpayers would rather pay nominal assessments for $100 or less just to avoid having to fool with it. Some taxpayers really have something to hide and do not want any more interface with the state than possible. My specific question: If states are really involved in this practice, do they keep a record of who pays them versus who resists? In other words, "We have overcalculated the failure-to-file penalty. 36,122 residents have paid without protest, whereas 2,980 residents have refused payment..." Is this paranoia on my part? Or am I giving the state too much credit? Or could this really be happening?
  10. Edsel

    Partner is Bought Out

    Judy, there are in fact unrealized receivables and inventory, thus the 8308 will be required. What is the impact on the partner? Also, I've never understood what the IRS means by "unrealized receivables." Does this mean unbilled revenue that should have been recorded but not yet billed, or simply receivables on the books which have not yet been paid?
  11. Edsel

    Conundrum (HOH/EIC)

    Termination of Service? No longer needed? Illigitimas, with me that is a one-way ticket for me to rid myself of this headache. You'll never be able to charge enough to justify saving this client from himself.
  12. Edsel

    Partner is Bought Out

    Abnormal, it's like "poetic license" - it doesn't have to rhyme. You civilized people would never understand. Only us hicks.
  13. Edsel

    SC Question

    I don't know why any of them wouldn't be deductible on the Federal Sch A. The one possible problem might be with the "new resident" fee on their vehicle. In my vague recollection, the "acid test" might be whether the fee is a fixed amount or varies with the value of the vehicle. I think anything based on value is deductible, whereas a fixed amount is not. Where I live, I average about one SC return per year. These are PY or full-year from people who move to my state, and there is nothing substantial that has ever caused me a problem. But a SC preparer would probably be aware of more nuances than I would.
  14. Edsel

    Partner is Bought Out

    Geographical idioms only - Abnormal and Judy don't live here. Tennessee, Kentucky, Virginia, North and South Carolina in particular. Tobacco farmers grow tobacco during the growing season, and it is harvested in late August early September. From that time until November, it hangs in a barn and undergoes a chemical process called "curing out" by simply hanging in a dry barn with some bit of air circulation. After it "cures out" it is ready to be sent to market to be crushed and diced into cigarettes. A farmer who has the nicotine habit can during October/November take a big leaf of cured tobacco, roll it up into paper, light up, and smoke instead of going to the store and paying huge money for cigarettes. Hence, they "roll their own chew". Translated into vernacular, "When a solution doesn't exist, the person comes up with one of their own design," per Judy.
  15. Edsel

    Partner is Bought Out

    A partner is bought out effective 01/01/18. The partner receives $XXXX dollars and has a basis of $XXXX as of 12/31/17. What is the partnership's responsibility to trigger the partner to show disposition of his interest? On the K-1 section reporting the basis, leave the basis as it was. I've been told before on another post that if there is no remaining interest, the basis (or capital) should show zero. Issue a 1099B for the gross payment to the partner upon selling his interest. Enter the basis in the proper place. Same as above, except do not enter anything in the box for basis. It is the partner's responsibility to track his own basis. The partnership has no responsibility to issue an information statement to force the partner to report the sale. Some other idea. Y'all can roll yer own chew...