joelgilb

Just did my first kiddie tax this year and as always I am incensed at how are government can tax a kid, in this case a 19 year old college student that had a measly $4200 capital gain at their parent's rate. So now this kid is taxed almost $600.00. Our politicians ought to be lined up and shot! And I mean ALL OF THEM! Joel

Ken: As for Scan and Fill, agree with the other Joel. Too many errors. By the time we proof this to correct the errors we could have entered the W-2's a few times over manually. Great concept that definitely fails in the execution. Also, after the first year, we are only entering numbers. I am pretty sure most of us are pretty proficient with a 10key and can enter numbers pretty quickly. So unless we are using low level secretarial and clerical staff to prepare returns at $7.00 to $8.00 per hour and then reviewing it, its virtually worthless. As for document managers, here are a couple of the high end ones, that are -- well to expensive for small offices, but do show what should be in a true document manager: I think this is one of the best, also Expensive! http://www.laserfiche.com and their guide at http://www.laserfiche.com/form/guide/document_management_guide.html?gclid=CITw8tTn458CFRkragodQUdCWw If I remember correctly a fairly feature full doc mgr: http://www.ademero.com/products/features/ This site has some nice information on going paperless: http://www.doc-it.net/main.cfm?CFID=4877678&CFTOKEN=51294445 another high end software: http://www.oracle.com/products/middleware/content-management/document-management.html More reasonable priced one, that seems to have added features recently. Once looked at it and found it limited, but not sure anymore: http://www.itaz.com/sohodox/index.htm Another low end one that seems to have recently added features: http://www.lucion.com/index.html Now some of what I think needs to be in a doc mgr: 1. OCR conversion to make contents of file searchable 2. Full Boolean search engine, not just the ability to find my client! What good is that? 3. Ability to maintain my own document structure (my file folders etc) and does not force me into there structure and change how I do things 4. Does not use proprietary formats 5. Ability to deal with multiple file formats - Word, Excel, WordPerfect PDF etc 6. PORTABLE - and I mean by this, when this softare dies, I don't lose anything when I have to go to another software 7. Allow me to create my own fields 8. Ability to automatically populate fields 9. Does not force me to use their fields. 10. OCR - I know I said this in number 1 above. It's IMPORTANT! How do you search for files by file name alone. I have over 3 terabytes of information. I don't want to look for that needle in the haystack by myself 11. It needs to be FAST! 12. Allow me to have Multiple file structures. I have some files sorted by client folders and some by type of document. For instance a folder called "Contracts - Leases". 13. Work on my computer Now how many of the small list above does ATX Doc Mgr do - ONE - #13, it works on my computer! Not real useful when you really get down to it. KC has a couple she finds interesting also, but I forget which ones. Joel Ok, I have ranted enough. Good luck with the search.

Boy oh Boy Not missing snow since I left Chicago and moved to Vegas! Although I must say we are getting a lot of rain here. and its cold today, only 52! Amazing how your perspective changes

hmmm Joel with a short answer, may I have turned over a new leaf...

or the short answer NO!

And Ken, one more thing I am known for my long winded posts. It's the attorney in me. Because as most of us know attorneys are paid mouths, the longer we talk the more money we make! Joel

This could be an extremely long post and Eric may not like me taking up all his bandwith! Plus I am turning over a new leaf (think it's a Palm leaf) and have decided not to bash CCH anymore (like anyone that knows me out here would believe that). So may be best to direct you to these posts in this community: And add -- if I remember correctly, you had to use Social Security numbers for each and every client. Well I don't do just Tax Preparation work (attorney here) and for non-tax clients I do not get Soc numbers. IMHO (and again for those that know me here -- I know, I am not really that humble), it just doesn't come even close to what a true document manager should do. That being said, all the tax software company's Doc Mgrs are not very good and the only good ones are rather pricey. In the posts above, there were some reasonable alternatives, although I am afraid they did not fit my needs, so I am still looking at ones in the $1,000 to $5000 range and not really willing to spend more than $1000. Just think Doc Mgrs are not really ready for the small user as the only ones that do a decent job are too expensive for small offices. And Ken, well you don't recall my other posts as I have been missing in action. Got sidetracked in the off season and started spending way to much time collecting E-Books. But it is tax season and I am BACK -- Sarcastic humor and all. Yes, Jainen, I am learning from you, but you are still the king here and I don't expect I will ever dethrone you there. So Jainen, I will just, as always, enjoy reading your posts! And oh everyone,the "--" is an emdash, told you I spent way to much time downloading ebooks. Judge Joel! Oh and Ken, the Judge title, is an an honorary title in this community. and we have a Hangman also, but I will let him introduce himself.

And I'll add to both KC and John. You are essentially negotiating a New Installment agreement and IRS is usually going to agree, but will often ask that you get your client to correct his withholding or estimated payments to stop this from happening in the future. Also, if like John said the amounts are over 25K, you may have to tak additional steps. You almost always need a 433F or 433 A at that point and IRS will generally require support for some of the financial statement numbers. Never yet had them not accept a new agreement though. Joel

Try a better program! lol Ok that was sarcastic I admit. But my opinion of ATX's is document manager has never been good as can be seen from other posts of mine. Hard to believe they can call that piece of crap a "Document Manager" at all. Joel

Well, think I am going to start producing TV shows then! Leave it to Jainen to find the loophole. How about a reality show about an OBGYN? Or OBGYN wannabee. I might even want to play the lead! And since its a reality show, who cares that I don't have a medical license. Especially if I produce it in the South or here in Vegas. Remember "What happens in Vegas Stays in Vegas! And thx for the welcome back Margaret

Awwww, and I was hoping to take a credit for my 73" screen TV. As well as the accompanying surround sound system. Hell, if I had know this wasn't available I would just have planned to watch the Superbowl at the sports book in the local casino. Now they have a BIG SCREEN! This is as bad as when I had to tell my clients that their pets don't qualify as dependents anymore!

Isn't it bad enough that Obama keeps knocking my new town? LOL Heard that one, but it is still cute

Never tried it but had the impression that it was more work than it was worth and you have confirmed everything I expected. Because, really, how long does it take us to enter a 1099 or W-2, especially if it is a client we had last year and the same employers. Joel

It's hard to compare these 2 programs as they have substatial differences in both strengths and weaknesses. for instance: Proseries is a faster program in my opinion, while ATX has a depth of forms far beyond anything on the market. Get a demo disk from ATX and try it out for yourself. I have used both and I love ATX, but still have issues with its speed. I also love that not only can I override any calculations, I can actually customize the forms, add my own formulas (ATX is excel based) , or add my own excel spreadsheets and the flow from one form to another, a flexibility not available in any other tax software.

Well to quote the treaty: "“ARTICLE 18 - Pensions 1. Payments under the social security legislation or similar legislation of a Contracting State to a resident of the other Contracting State, and pension distributions and other similar remuneration arising in one of the Contracting States in consideration of past employment paid to a resident of the other contracting State, whether paid periodically or in a lump sum, shall be taxable only in the first-mentioned State. For purposes of this paragraph, pension distributions and other similar remuneration shall be deemed to arise in a Contracting State only if paid by a pension or other retirement arrangement established in that State." and the IRS explanation: "Paragraph 1 provides for exclusive source country taxation of social security benefits, pension distributions and other similar remuneration paid by a pension or other retirement arrangement established in one Contracting State to a resident of the other Contracting State. The rule applies to both periodic and lump sum payments." OK, that's some of the worst legalese I have ever seen written. Party of the first part and the party of the 2nd party residing in the location of the 1st..... But, it means that France and the U.S. have decided to etch out a special exception to the normal rules by ... well... Treaty. No particular rhyme or reason for this and the U.S. has not done this with every country, although I am pretty sure they have done the same with Ireland and who knows what other country. Guess we just need to watch for this and then go to the IRS site and review the treaties in cases where we see source income from foreign countries. I was just having some trouble following the flow from the language alone and had to basically flow chart it. Should have done that from the start. Hope that helps KC and still thx for your input. Joel

Since it was us that caused all the ATX - TRX issues in the first place, maybe we should leave well enough alone. TRX had issues with ATX because we (and I am one of the culprits here) started letting everyone know they were repackaging ATX for far less money than CCH sells it for. We had numerous posts here on this, and several actually called CCH (I will say here though, that I did not do that one). So here is what I know: Since TRX needed a 2nd software to sell, and because of US they were limited on ATX to selling 500 units, TRX and CCH had to renegotiate their deal. To avoid being held to exclusively selling one program (the repackaged Taxwise) CCH and TRX agreed that CCh would take back ATX and allow TRX to pickup a new repackaged tax software from another company. I believe their new software is from RedGear. I was one of the 500 (sounds like a movie in the making) that purchased ATX through TRX. I have called TRX several times for various things and have nothing but good things to say about them. They are courteous, responsive and extremely helpful and supporting me with actual tax questions, even though they have agreed with CCH, that CCH is supporting the ATX software that TRX sold me (now that sounds like a run-on sentence). And I am still able to get to their forum. Not that we should be afraid of CCH, I still think we should drop this subject, so not to hurt TRX anymore than has already happened. At this point I intend to stay with ATX, because I like the software, not the company behind it. We all know who has the big guns and who has already used them (they'll use them again, you can be certain of that). We need alternatives, even if we don't like the software that TRX has to offer at this time. Lets not kill an alternative for those that want it, nor hurt TRX anymore than we already have.

Ok I have beat this one up over and over because I was having a mental block and just wasn't reading the Treaty properly. So I reread it (several times), made a new determination (again and again and again - sometimes you just have a mind F_rt). And then to check myself one more time I spoke with a International Law attorney that deals with treaties more often than me, and he agreed. Not Taxable in the U.S.! whew I feel better now (this client better pay me for this effort!)

Thx KC. That was what I was seeing when I read it too, but sometimes you just want a second opinion, especially when the client doesn't agree with you. FYI - In this case hub and wife are actually U.S. citizens as well as French citizens (France allows dual citizenship). As I see it that someone with a green card or that is a U.S. citizen would have fall under the same rules though. Again, thx for the 2nd! Joel

Your Welcome Sandy. Wish I could tell you how it runs on Vista, but have only used XP in recent years and avoided Vista like the plague (just like I did for Windows ME). But Windows 7 sounds interesting and there may be an upgrade for $150 that covers up to 3 PC's

Received my notice quite timely, not that I am going all the way to TN. But if anyone from here does go, let me know how it was.

I contacted them right away. 1. I gave them all my thoughts on the tax industry (took me about 3,471 Word pages at font point 10 to get almost everything I wanted them to know.) Then I gave them all the following information: 2. Social Sec #'s 3. FEINs 4. PTIN's 5. EFIN's 6. Bank Account Numbers, 7. Loan Numbers 8. Investment Account Numbers 9. Every Password I have for Every Site on the Internet 10. Every piece of information including Soc Sec #'s for every client I have ever worked for. 11. And finally my First Born Child (maybe I will give them my second as well) What a load off my mind...

Interesting problem. Does ATX run on Windows 7? and correct link is: http://www.pcworld.com/article/164437/wind..._some_cpus.html

Not the answer I was looking for. LOL

Have a client who has dual citizenship here and in France and has been a resident of U.S. for 12 years. Hub is currently collecting a $14K pension from the French government. Been looking at the Treaty and have been trying to determine if they are subject to tax on the French Pension here in the U.S. Treaty and IRS explanation almost seem to conflict. Treaty (new 2004 protcol says in part: http://www.ustreas.gov/offices/tax-policy/...eprotocol04.pdf ARTICLE III Article 18 (Pensions) of the Convention shall be deleted and replaced by the following: “ARTICLE 18 - Pensions 1. Payments under the social security legislation or similar legislation of a Contracting State to a resident of the other Contracting State, and pension distributions and other similar remuneration arising in one of the Contracting States in consideration of past employment paid to a resident of the other contracting State, whether paid periodically or in a lump sum, shall be taxable only in the first-mentioned State. For purposes of this paragraph, pension distributions and other similar remuneration shall be deemed to arise in a Contracting State only if paid by a pension or other retirement arrangement established in that State. IRS Explanation says in part: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-trty/france_te_...ocol_103-32.pdf Paragraph 2 of Article 18 is an exception to the saving clause of paragraph 2 of Article 29 by virtue of paragraph 3(B ) of Article 29 as revised by this Protocol, but only in the case of individuals who are neither citizens of, nor have immigrant status in, the United States. The term "immigrant status" refers to a person admitted to the United States as a permanent resident under U.S. immigration laws (i.e., holding a "green card"). Accordingly, a U.S. resident (who is not a citizen or a green card holder) who is a beneficiary of a French pension plan will not be subject to tax in the United States on the earnings and accretions of, or the contributions made to, a French exempt pension trust with respect to that U.S. resident. So it looks like ... well it coudl go either way, but I am leaning to taxing in the U.S. Any thoughts would be appreciated.