Medlin Software, Dennis

Interesting. They must write in a specific exclusion for not having a valid WISP. Similar to how an auto policy may have an exclusion for speed contests. Should still cover failing to do what the WISP says, such as via human error.

The coverage is usually thought of as providing for and paying for defense, with remainder for settlement (often credit monitoring) and cash payout (if needed). In my case, I don’t have or keep anything of risk, but I have the coverage mainly for defending claims (anyone can file anything!).

Mine is packaged with my business and E&O insurance. I prefer an all in one, not piecemeal. IIRC, and maybe I don't, the CI was an add on to the business insurance.

They already do charge for that. And most also have to pay the charge card fee on the tip amount too.

Where do any employer regulations require the current employer to ask for data/information from the prior? And the same, where are there directions/permission/rules allowing any former employer to share data with a different employer? I have not looked myself... but your post makes it appear you know of such a rule. Assuming the limits are the limits, I suspect it is up to the employee to manage, not the employer (although the employer should be watching they do not exceed any limits on their contributions).

Makes sense when comparing to employer deposits. Employer deposits get incorrectly tagged all the time, and eventually, it gets corrected on the IRS end. Sometimes it takes getting a bill, a refund check, then paying again, but it does work out. EFTPS, for example, still asks for break downs for the 941 amounts, but they have never been, and are still not required to be entered. What I hear most is when someone deposits something into 941 instead of 941 (the box selection in EFTPS). If there is a balance owed, the IRS will apply whatever overage or deposits they find, sometimes asking, sometimes not.

Can / will the client log into (create if needed) their online IRS portal and review their information, such as payments?

Without loopholes, where would the tax prep/interp/advice industry be?

The Ohtani (baseball) contract has CA in the news. CA wants to be able to tax the deferred income such as in the Ohtani contract. I guess, at present, Ohtani's representatives were able to stick it to CA (and possibly IRS) with the huge deferral, expected to be paid after he retires and likely changes domicile to a more tax friendly location. https://www.sfgate.com/sports/article/shohei-ohtani-s-dodgers-deal-prompts-california-18598483.php Maybe this is a loophole others can use as well, such as nearing or at no need for taxable income, yet not claiming SS at present. Defer income until SS claimed and spread it out a bit if desired. Would likely need to provide some sort of guarantee via insurance or other non taxable means, in case the paying entity disappears. There is a reason why it is impossible for CA and NY teams to bid the same as other teams with 81 home games (entertainment performances) in a more tax friendly or an income tax free state.

SS WH, for instance, if someone earned enough to go over the limit at one job, then get/have another job in the same year, the second employer MUST still WH SS based on their own YTD for the employee. It is up to the employee to get credit/reimbursed. Meaning there is nothing an employee can say to employer 2 to have them stop SS WH even if they have gone over the required amount for the year because of other employment. I suspect retirement is similar in that one employer has no responsibility or ability to monitor any other employer, so in the case of retirement, if the plans allow, the employee can elect to manage their contributions/matches in such a way as to not go over the limit in total. If the employee goes over the limit, it is up to the employee to handle the issue, not the employers. Of course, the employee would be wise to contribute as much as they can if one has more matching funds, or to split it evenly if both have similar matching funds (as a kindness to both employers).

Still not back to calm. Just got a nasty gram from a person signing their name with CPA at the end who went on about a 941b having to show their deposits. Even quoting the text on the form where it is clear it is for liability not deposits, did not seem to change their mind.

I have faint memory of there being some traction towards altering some credits too, so the advice in the article was to consider waiting to file personal (and maybe some business?). For me, I file on the deadline, for reasons of time, and just in case something changes. But, I also manage my deposits to I am at or neat the max owed without getting into penalty, so I have no fake incentive for filing early (using withholding as a sort of Christmas Club / forced savings). I even tried, and failed, to share with others how to manage withholding to be less to compensate for the 2023 EV credit rather than loaning the PTB the over withheld amounts. It is just a concept few understand.

Makes sense. I cannot have my income go to something else, say our daughter's able account to bypass it being my income. I have those crazy thoughts as I transition to having enough SS wage history to begin to look at lowering wages and increasing non wage income. Likely will be a good old minimum reasonable wage and more dist at some point.

To me, it makes sense to not start until the first working day of Feb. Why? Because they, stated or not (I cannot remember) are checking against W2 data, which is not required to be submitted until the end of Jan. NMore time for reliability and common sense accuracy of their efile process cannot be a bad thing at all. IIRC, 1099 filing is not yet available either, so that is another barrier to personal filing (and will be more of a barrier next year).

I am suspect of any late ERC claims. Why? The availability was "all over" the news at the time. Any employer who failed to claim is derelict in duty. Any corp should be replacing those who failed to represent the corp properly, failed their fiduciary duty. With the above said, some slip through who are genuine folks. But, the caveat is most of the late claims are third party claims, where the employer has granted some percentage of the credit to the third party, without pondering, for one second, the cost of amending other items too, and how little they will get, or maybe even nothing, or owe, for thee late contingency claims. That is assuming the third party type claim is even legit - meaning the emplyoer really had eligible amounts to claim, which can be suspect in certain cases.

There is always an amount of money which makes any task "easy" to do. Whether or not this prospect will pay it is the question.

Employee copies can be printed on plain paper too, if software is capable. As long as the required data and information is provided, the format is unrestricted.

Tom is expert all things FTB!

I have a well work list of my search for mistakes process. But I do not go beyond that for pennies (or depending on the client, some amount, usually $100). They do not appreciate paying for my time to find pennies. The majority of the time, it was not an entry error, it was an error with the client's records, such as a check record. We all live with such "close" enough. IRS has been doing it for a long time (rounding withholding, rounding on tax returns). No refund/collection unless asked of the 941 (and likely others) were not more than $1. I am sure there are more, not just the new announcement.

I do, and I am thankful. Our home, via circumstances out of our control, has for 30 years appreciated just under 2k per month, and will likely continue. While we would likely be able to find a different place to domicile, it is tough to give up the appreciation.

Most likely because the counters decided those numbers were at or below their break even point for investigation. No matter the reason, it is good. My first accounting class had a story of a perfectionist who spent a long time finding a penny error, and their pride led to their firing. For me, I took that to heart and when I was counting for others, came up with a threahold which I would not investigate beyond a few minutes of hunting the obvious. Over time, the “adjustments” usually washed.

UGH. One of our kids is dealing with a break in/theft, and the person who they can prove did it, is related to a muckety muck in their local law enforcement. We have given them our suggestion (ask the DA who their mutual aid agency is, which should be compelled to investigate), and get their landlord and renters insurance folks involved. Calm is over...

Just got a nastygram because I asked someone to follow written directions. Same directions the person has been following every year since the early 90's. Yes, calm is over. Added: The pay on the spot ability is something every employer should be prepared and able to do. Cash, check, whatever. Power outage, banking issues, other disaster. Be prepared to take care of those who take care of you. When pressed, my advice is to have cash or checks on hand, and the ability to access/sign, at all times. At least be able to pay a few days wages, even if a WAG, to all, in case the accountant/payroll person disappears, computer fails, power is out, etc.

As time marches on, those who are experts in all but the most "micro" of "things" wanes. Employers are no different. For employers, the most reliable advice is to pay at least twice a month (more often if required), pay on the spot at separation, and make your tax deposits at the same time you make your payroll payments. It is all about preventing errors/omissions, not playing games to the fullest extent of the rules - or as I hear daily - trying to make what amounts to a few cents floating trust fund monies. Of course, the above goes against all who have FBD or MetaD after their name (Doctor of Facebook or Doctor of Googling). I guess I am officially a boomer/old timer, since I remember when googol was just a number with a leading 1 followed by 100 zeroes. It was such a cool concept to a grade schooler it helped trigger my fascination with numbers/mathematics.

I have not verified these, but for OR, on a reputable amalgamation site: If the above is accurate, for OR, I would suggest all pay on the spot rather than rely on proving an exception. Advance notice of at least 48 hours seems to require spot payment (sans weekend and holiday - with holiday not defined and cause more grey area, state, local, tribal, federal, all, some?), not within 24 hours. For me, defense is a waste of time (money) so dragging things out, even to make a point, is an unneeded head and wallet ache. In my case, hourly employees are not performing any services the remainder of the year, and others have already been paid for Dec, so I am at zero risk of needing to add another paycheck in 2023.