Julie

One of the instructors I had at HRB (that was a long time ago now) used to call these "God returns," since presumably that's where they hope to get the answers.

Actually, in spite of all that's been said, I do know what you mean. You want to be reassured that they know what's going on. I have faith that they'll get this part right, since they have to get it right in ATX, Taxwise and ProSystem. With three programs, it's not likely they'll miss a major change in tax law. On the other hand, I still don't plan to renew before fall, when I'll get around to thinking about it.

Yay!!! Congratulations!!!

I switched from Eudora to Thunderbird when AT&T stopped accepting Eudora's security protocols. In general, I'm not really happy with the change. Thunderbird does not handle the multiple addresses/personalities as smoothly as Eudora. It's much slower, especially with complex filters. Penelope applies some aesthetic changes to Thunderbird to make it look more like Eudora, but it still works like Thunderbird. Thunderbird does have some improvements in this regard since I've been using it, but it has a way to go. If AT&T would accept it, I'd be back to Eudora tomorrow.

Not sure we're going to find out before January. Haven't seen much of JB off season.

Hope it helped you make up your mind.

Not required unless the customer asks for it. Any form with substantially the same information is an adequate substitute.

You generally don't have to pay full price again. Whether you have to pay anything depends on how recently you bought the program. I think I had to pay $10 last time, but I think I've only had to pay twice for updates, and I've had the program since 2000 or 2001. You do, however, have to download the entire program again, not just the postage update.

I've never taken credit cards before, but I expect to begin soon, now that my business is half art gallery.

I just bought this exact model last July. If it comes with full-sized cartridges (as mine did), the value of the toner exceeds the cost of the machine. Color toner cartridges cost $83 (you need three of them), and I think the black is $79. I use it on my small network (2 computers, both running WinXP). Unless you do a lot of color printing, you will not need to change the color cartridges often. I just changed two of mine for the first time. Still have never changed the yellow cartridge. I bought it because my husband is an artist and we needed to print color brochures and catalogs for his show (and our inkjet printer died in the process). It does that kind of work very well. It has problems with glossy paper, though, even if it's labeled for laser printers. I think that hp makes special paper for color laserjets, but it does a beautiful job with plain paper and cardstock. Our full-color brochures were printed on plain office paper, and came out with a beautiful soft-gloss/satin finish. Folded and saddle-stapled, you wouldn't know they weren't professional work. So, yes, I'm pleased with mine. I do not use it for tax returns, although it's ready if I need a backup. My 8-year-old hp laserjet 3150 all-in-one still works fine, and with less lead time. Yes, that is another fault of the 2600. It needs a few minutes to think about each print job. Once it gets going, though, the speed is reasonable. Typically the older printer will be faster, even with a slower nominal speed.

I'm using Endicia with a simple digital postage scale that I bought for use with ClickStampOnline. (which, by the way, was better and cheaper than Endicia...perhaps that's why PitneyBowes discontinued it.) But I also use Desktop Dozen for general calculation, postage and otherwise. Sometimes you gotta use stamps.

I agree about the fairmark link. I spent a fair amount of time looking at it, and added it to my bookmarks. I only have a few (Bay Area) clients with options, so I don't get everything memorized.

I eventually found the book I needed last night....other than final checking, I think it's done. I wanted to make sure of the holding periods for ISOs....this one is disqualified. Had to empty a half-dozen boxes of books to find it, but most of them are on shelves now.

Thanks, KC. Just got one of the bookcases set up, so I can start looking through boxes tonight....just as soon as I finish mailing my new address to all my clients. I think I can get the rest of those out in another hour. Expecting clients to be patient is apparently a bit unreasonable. Hope you and your husband are doing better. I haven't said anything, but have been thinking about you.

I'm now in my new office, but a far cry from being unpacked. My husband is still getting the last few boxes from the old location. I did get the computers set up today, though, and one of the printers. Anyway, I have a client (complaining loudly that I haven't finished his tax return yet) with stock options, and all my reference books are still packed somewhere in this mountain. I have a really good book on the subject, but.....Anyone know of a good quick online guide so I don't get too confused here? Looks like the relevant ones are both ISOs. Thanks!

I have one, but I've only used it a few times. It's a bit awkward, because you send your file in an email, and the "to" address contains your username and password. You have to prepay, like internet postage, and they deduct the cost from your account. I keep losing the template I use for sending them. I have a fax machine, but only one phone line. They do the job, though, exactly as promised.

Sure you can add sales tax to the shipping in California. You're supposed to, if the shipping cost is not separated from "handling" and other phony surcharges you're charging your customer. Read the BOE booklet...I believe it explains that. If, on the other hand, you pass the exact amount on to the customer, sales tax doesn't apply. I'm providing the link below; I edited the quotes for length. http://www.boe.ca.gov/pdf/reg1628.pdf Except .... in the case of a sale, whether by lease or otherwise, tax does not apply to “separately stated” charges for transportation of property... Transportation charges will be regarded as “separately stated” only if they are separately set forth in the contract for sale or in a document reflecting that contract, issued contemporaneously with the sale, such as the retailer’s invoice. .... If a separately stated charge is made designated “postage and handling” or “shipping and handling”, only that portion of the charge which represents actual postage or actual shipment may be excluded from the measure of tax.

Some malicious types will try to bring down a forum by flooding it with posts, often automatically generated, so that hundreds can be sent in a few minutes. Flood control just sets a maximum frequency of posts, in this case one every fifteen seconds. You might notice it if you write very short posts. I ran into it once.

I'm on the back side of the shopping center. I have two outside doors, one is on the back (near the Tallac Lounge) and the other is on a walking path inside. I believe that, at least for part of its length, Y st is considered the boundary of Oak Park. And you know how deadly that label can be.

I agree that the little strip mall with JH is pretty scuzzy....but I was across the street next to Mr. Video. The place where I worked is (I think) a cigarette store now, since HRB moved past the grocery store (now FoodsCo) to the inside of the shopping center, close to where Dollar Tree used to be. So far as I can tell, Stockton Blvd is the dividing line. The east side is not bad, the west side, well... Let's just say that being in a good neighborhood will be a new experience for me. The open house will be a Saturday in July....either the second or third Saturday, if all goes well.

I haven't worked from home in several years now, but where I am is almost as private. Before that, I put in five years at the HRB at Stockton Blvd and Fruitridge Rd, with an 80% EIC clientele. I saw all that and more before leaving to go out on my own. Seems like the anonymity of HRB made them feel like they could get by with anything. I'm out of practice now, but I used to be pretty good at spotting them. That's one thing I've enjoyed about being on my own....I don't get clients who lie to me. But, yes, I know that open doors and signs will attract people, some of whom I don't want to talk to. But Tahoe Park, although not far away (neighborhood boundaries are rather sharp in Sacramento), is a very middle-class neighborhood, and I don't expect to get all that many of those.

Joel, check out the links I posted last night. There are specific instructions for rentals as well as businesses.

Yes, the income is going to be 50/50 under community property laws, but SE tax is not allocated 50/50. SE tax is supposed to be applied to the earner, not the community. I have an MFS couple where each has a Sch C....I can't make the comm prop adjustment on the C, because that would screw up the SE. So I made it on the worksheet between the C and 1040 in ATX. I remember reading an IRS ruling about six years ago where they decided that CA businesses did not automatically have to file 1065's for community property (good thing, since no one was doing it.) Hadn't even occurred to me to think about it before then. For a rental this would not matter in California, because there is no SE tax involved, and community property is automatically a 50/50 split. (Although, on an MFS return, you still have to ask some questions....) There was a time when ATX did not have that check box. I remember.

I'm gonna bet you're right. Has anyone noticed that ATX provides no easy way to comply with the joint venture rules? They require that the business file two Sch C's for the year, for the same business. "Duplicate form" merely opens a new blank C. (TRX doesn't handle this, either.) ATX wants you to file a single Sch C with two SEs, which is not allowed under the QJV rules. Logically, if one clicks the "joint" box on the C, it should ask for a percentage (default=50/50) and then print two Cs, each with half the income or expense. But it doesn't. It apparently forces you to fill out the Sch C twice, once for each spouse. BTW, I can't complain to ATX because I'm locked out of their website. Answering the question correctly doesn't work. reference: http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/articl...=177376,00.html http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p553.pdf, pp 14-15

T'was only a bad joke, and there's no connection between those two comments. Perhaps it would make sense if you knew that Joel was not the only guy around to make jokes about concubines. That's all. Nothing more to tell.