Medlin Software, Dennis

I somewhat agree with Abby Normal. If your backup solution only offers incremental backups, I would look elsewhere. I prefer full backups each time, which stand alone. Incremental backups take more care to restore, since you have to go back to the last full, restore, then restore each following incremental. That is why I use a tool such as Cobian, so I make my own backup, compress and encrypt, then send that one file to multiple places to be my latest backup. I do not use imaging, since I would not want whatever was on my former computer to be transferred to my new. I want a new clean computer, reinstall my applications, then restore my data. If a faster result is needed, in advance, obtain, setup, and maintain a second computer in a safe location (safe from the same disaster risk as your main, not on the same desk, in the same office, on the same network, etc.).

That is excellent news. While I do not use ATX, I was hoping they, like many of us software makers, spend a large amount of time on protecting our customers from human and non human errors. In our case (like it appears ATX does too) we have a very lightly documented (to try to keep people from manipulating or replying on it) a third set of local data, which, unless the drive is completely unusable, or human manipulated, provides a double secret (pun intended) set of data to try to recover. My point is, when something happens, and you have no workable recovery plan of your own in place, contact the software vendor and ask what options they have (before trying any sort of self recovery).

There are programs, pre processors if you will, you can use to make internal compressed and encrypted backups. You can then have your external backup solution make backups of the compressed encrypted files. I use a program called Cobian to make the actual file I backup. Cobian encrypts and compresses. It is not a program for the raw computer novice, as it does take some setup, but if patient, not any more complicated than something like Carbonite. You could then have your backup solution make a backup of just the one file Cobian made, and not have to worry about the security of the backup solution or location. You could hand your backup to all but the most determined and cost unlimited hacker (since I consider nothing unbreakable given time and resources) and be in good shape.

What you found is not actually a carbonite specific issue. Many "third party" backup providers fail to "in your face" teach you that their default backup settings are unlikely to backup all you were hoping to. Why? Unless the backup software defaulted to backup all folders on all drives (which would be completely wasteful), the backup defaults can only be set to known common folders, which are not likely to include all important data. (This is an all too often issue I have to deal with with my own customers.) 1. Rely FIRST on the application creator for instructions on backing up date from the software they wrote. Application vendors have a vested interest in making backup and restore easy for you (and for them), and will reliably capture all data needed for that application. 2. THEN, setup your third party backup solution to capture the backups made by your applications. 3. For most, in addition to #2, let the third party backup solution use their defaults, with the items in #2 manually added to the list of items backed up. 4. VERIFY your backup. If you have never taken the time to restore, your backup, as sadly you experienced, can be worse than no backup at all, since you thought you had something you did not. After a disaster is not the time to be doing your first restore.. Verify (by doing a full test restore) will also allow you to see what was actually backed up, if you can reinstall the applications, and allows for adjustments before the disaster. 5. How to verify? Have or obtain a clean computer to restore onto. Not only will you then have at least something to use after a disaster (assuming you keep the spare in a separate location, so it is not subject to the same disaster), you have an easy way to verify your restore process. If a space computer is not an option (and it should be considered part of doing business, not something you cannot afford), you can at least test restore your data, say into a separate folder you create (instead of overwriting your live data). 6. I am completely jaded in this area of computing, since I hear daily from folks who had no backup, or thought they had a backup. Like "safe hex" (protecting yourself from computer contamination by controlling your fingers), there is no software you can buy which will eliminate some manual interaction to ensure proper backups. All is not lost. While you may have suffered now, you can make some good, by making this the last time you do not have good, working, and tested backups. You may be able to find a good local tech (not a wipe and reinstall tech) who can put in a power supply they have laying around, and get your data transferred. A good tech could also take the drive out and get the data. DO NOT use the drive any more, as deleted files can often be recovered by a good tech!

AL, IA, MO, and OR. Lower FWH INCREASES their SWH... Interestingly enough, none of the four, IIRC, make any adjustments should an administration lower FWH. Since my business is payroll, I do not follow their actual tax returns to see if SWH is calculated accurately to actual liability, but you can be certain those 4 states know what they are doing, and have zero issue taking in more money each payday as FWH brackets change (revenue stream). It has only been a few years since one state WH calculation was a flat percent of FWH, but they finally had to end that as an option as FWH kept adjusting down... There is one state which made huge tax base adjustments, adding sales taxes here and there (especially on certain former tax free services(, added higher/nwe sin taxes, lowering others including some big ones beneficial to business owners, but I guarantee you, it was for an overall increase, not a decrease... which the politicians actually acknowledged, which hurt the lower income folks and benefited the upper income folks, with some flash back to trickle down theory. We all have had to accept government is a business too. It has to make more money each year to operate, and because of certain workings, will always spend at or just over their budget each year. Employes of government like regular raises like private sector employees...

Projecting the calculation algorithms to comply with the proposed changes (as well as allowing the existing form) took no more than a few minutes for me. What took longer was making space, and making readable, the proposed new parameters on pay stubs. The real push back (I suspect) is caused by the lazy you know what states and tax agencies, who continue to use federal withholding for any part of their own revenue stream calculations. Employees, under the proposed changes, can do nothing and continue to use any existing w4 they have in place (2018, 2015, etc.) Any new W4 would have to be the current year (as always). Employers will be encouraged to get new forms, but do not have to. Any media report of complication for software developers is simply untrue.

My all time fav was a weekly "shop supplies" check made out to Costco...

The employer needs expert legal advice. A larger practice may be best, since there are employment (taxation and reporting) and company issues (liability for the work location for starters) which should no longer be ignored. The employer "opened" and "managed" a location in GA they have likely not been properly caring for.

I think the release is nothing more than a WAG or a political statement. Personally, I suspect those that actively manage their finances (either personally, or via a professional) can be left out of any such speculation, since they choose what they pay in advance. Those who simply accept what their W4 gets them, a fair number, maybe even the majority, use "people" to mean allowances, and instead of getting a large refund for their interest free gift to the uncle, will get a smaller refund, or maybe owe a small amount. Those that annually have a balance due, and have not rectified the issue, will always be in that boat via choice, not via advance tax calculation shenanigans.

Sorry for what? I did not say not to use security methods beyond what controls your fingers :) To be blunt, I am saying that there currently is no paid security software I recommend (and has not been since Peter sold to Symantec). For instance, Microsoft has a very workable free system which can be used for live protection (if that makes you more comfortable), and there is a free tool (VirusTotal) which can be used for any site and download. VT checks against the daily updates from more than 60 security software vendors, for free. Depending on the day, VT results can show one or two "issues" with a file that has nothing nefarious in it. Nothing wrong with that at all, since the other results will be clear, and based on the state of security software, the outlier's can be safely considered to be "false positives". The thing is, anyone can search for an catch "known" security issues. This is not a problem, other than a veteran computer user should never be hit by known issues (making security software actually moot). (Do not open unknown links, unknown websites, etc.) Where the false positives come from is when security software is built to always or has been set to what amounts to making a WAG as some as yet unseen, unknown, or undiscovered issue, believing they can out think people who spend their lives trying to steal. These guesses result in the false positives, and make it so most know that to install software from a trusted site, it is often easier to DISABLE the software which is supposed to protect you. A security tool which has to be disabled is worse than useless (IMO). Imagine if you were driving your auto, came to a certain spot in the road, and had to take off your seat belt to go where you want to go... These incorrect WAG messages are very profitable for the security software vendors, as they are a reminder the user is getting "something" of value from their security software! Helps at renewal time if the user has memory of seeing "protection" messages. VT was originally offered by Google (may still be, have not checked). It amalgamates current security software "definitions" (the signatures/patterns the security software is looking for), and tests items against more than 60 security vendors. VT also makes available the results to the security software vendors, to help improve their products - if they wish.

True, goes to show how many security software vendors provide products which waste more time than they ever could save... 1. If you use a security software product, update it before every download. 2. If you initiate a download from a site you consider reasonable, any security issues are likely a false positive from your security software. 3. A free site, such as VirusTotal, is a much better way to test downloads than paying for security software.

Yep, back in the old days, most were receiving large refunds (those who were filling out their form "straight up"). A few politicians later, the ones who made changes to make net pay appear bigger as an election point, and we have many who are cutting it close, or going negative, with a "straight up" W4 form. Those that actively manage their withholding, at least honestly, will always come out fine (or as desired). The ones who just go with the standard entries, they are the ones who are at risk, although less likely so starting with the 2019 form (since many will not delve into things like child credits). The recent ones I dealt with are KY (lowered withholding, raised sales tax, for a net tax increase - since no government ever takes a pay cut) and ID, which altered their withholding calculations to make "allowances" mean child tax credits, without requiring employees to provide an updated W4 (so many are now effectively taking a child tax credit for self and spouse), and the ID "W4" instructions actually create a form which is invalid for federal use, even though it is what ID suggests... But, as I get older, I accept what will be will be, and understand complication is good for me.

It may help for the remainder of 2018, but for 2019, there will be the new W4 form to deal with... For most here, it will be learning how to assist clients in filling out the new form. While I do not do many tax returns, the new W4 form appears easier (for a tax preparer) to provide numbers for, since the employee can include exact figures of additional income and credits to consider for withholding calculations. Yes, it is different, but change does equal income, for those of us on the business side...

We always remind employers it is not the employer's place to discuss how to prepare a W4. That is what the employee's tax person can be paid to help with, if the employee needs help. Looking at the form, I suspect most "normal" employees will not need special instruction, provided they even submit a new form. The other employees have likely been dealing with management of their withholding before, and have the means to create a valid new form. For the calculation, the IRS is giving a clue (via the W4 instructions) how the calculations will be different, with a section titles "Instructions for Employer". For computerized payroll, no real problem calculating. For those using tables, more steps, but speed is not likely important to those using tables :). The tables will still have allowance columns, as it was important to not require new W4 forms. Spit balling, I will probably add W4 setup for the new W4 "lines". The existing field to enter allowances can remain, as a visual clue as to the 2019 defaults, and to also show the value entered prior to 2019. If any numbers are added in the new lines, the allowances will be set to the defaults. I would rather not show the allowances if a new W4 is used, but many employees like to check their checks, and most will use the tables. I think for clarity, the new line figures will need to somehow be reflected on the stub, meaning the employee will have the means to reverse calculate their withholding. Not sure exactly how yet, but it should not be difficult. Probably some way to show the wages, the adjustments, and the total used for taxable.

The new form, to get a flat dollar amount, one could enter a large figure in 6 and or 7, enough to get withholding to zero (based on the calculations), then enter the desired amount per check in 9.

This type will likely be the ones who need zero assistance, other than maybe, if they ask, to "not" enter any figures in 5, 6, 7, 8, or 9. --- There is simply a large amount of misinformation about W4 already. I recently had the "privilege" of teaching a local quasi government agency. They provide supported work training. Their clients earn min wage, for a short time while training. Most, if not all, do not work enough to even be required to file a return, and most do not have the knowledge to do so even if they were required (meaning they are likely paying someone to manage their affairs, or are conserved). The agency was not even asking for W4 forms, somehow thinking it was easier to use single zero for all. (Probably true, as asking for a W4 would no doubt have involved office time.) I had one person submit a proper form marked as exempt. This caused a phone call, where the agency was not so subtlety asking me to not use the form, since the agency would have to send it to the IRS because it was marked as exempt. I could not hold back, and ranted about screwing those who need the couple of dollars now, not later, and that their "policy" was likely costing their clients money, as many would not file a tax return (for the refund), or those that did, were having to pay for (in money or time) an unneeded return, which could cost more than the refund. I then pointed out it has been years since the IRS required any employer to forward a W4...

It looks as if just marking a reasonable "status" will be a safe course. The withholding calculations appear to factor in the standard deduction (the reason for the status, and for deducting the standard deduction if using line 6. For most, meaning those who do not seek professional advice, the new form will be harder to get to a balance due situation. For those seeking advice, it appears no more difficult to get accurate than current. I have increased my "harping" on employers requiring a federal W4 form, and a separate form (W4, or whatever the state requires). For safety, NO MORE one form for both! Separate forms remove any conflicts, since it will take years for states which use any part of federal calculations to come up with their own changes. One state has already screwed up, since they are saying to use the federal W4 with additional entries, which actually invalidates the form for federal purposes... (Note, my perspective is heavily tilted towards protecting employers, and using invalid W4 information can cause harm to the employer.)

Ha ha, it will never get easier... Looking only at the form, my guess is employers will have to have a way to input - in addition to the current ability for the employee to ask for additional withholding - additional "untaxed" income (which will then be added to the earnings before tax calculation). Annualized Wages + Line 5 + Line 8 = Annual taxable income (as earned and declared by employee) Calculate withholding (annualized) Less Line 6 and Line 7 Divide by paydays per year Add Line 9 to get withholding on current check ---- Or, by pay period after dividing the W4 annual employee figures by paydays per year. --- No "allowances" means the "old somewhat allowed" way of indicating a specific amount per check (high allowances, desired amount as "additional") will be gone.

The largest raised dough I made were the max diameter of the proofer/fryer screens, 2ft x 2ft cooked. Impossible to flip without damage, so they were dunk fried and did not have the white line around them.

I may dust off my custom cutter and make some, but as an old (long ago, not age!) dough slinger, I only truly enjoy donuts I make... and they have to be hand rolled, cut, and fried, not put through a sheeter or any other automation.

Have received foster care payments, respite care payments, and adoption assistance, none of which were reportable/taxable to us. It has been many years, but I have faint memory of doing the research. There must be some official phrase, term, or title for the payments which you can research.

Several states actively "took" the perceived federal savings. At least one state, by doing nothing, also got a "raise". That's the rub, so many only look at one piece of the puzzle, and some think taxes can actually go down. Tax planning has to take all items into account, such as I am learning from a specialized group who live in their RV full time, and can domicile wherever they wish. The one caveat for the RV perspective is health care, especially if not yet on Medicare. The main states RV'ers use are the obvious, the ones with no income tax. Those states generally also have lower vehicle registration fees, among other things beneficial to those not worried about actually living in their domicile state.

Could be they were well taught by their former provider, either way, enjoy!

"You can bet it is not a decrease or the Kentucky State government would not have done it." That is always my point. There is no chance a government will ever approve anything which in some way does not give the government a raise. Just the reality, not a comment on any business (government is a business).

KY appears to be going to a flat 5% tax rate (instead of brackets). In addition, sales tax has been added to 17 prior exempt items, and cigarette tax nearly doubled, which most wonks have calculated will raise income for the state. Interestingly, one of my customers wanted to argue how I "bought the kool-aid of the liberals" because I too see it as an actual tax raise (overall) on all but the very highest earners. I foolishly tried to explain taxation NEVER goes down as government has a cost, and the cost never goes down, so taxes or debt (income) has to go up... Most reports show the result as a tax hike on all but the top 5% of KY earners. I found a few who claim it will reduce KY's income, but those are the ones I do not believe...