Medlin Software, Dennis

Pondering the issue personally, meaning what would I do if there was an option to truncate? I would not. Why? It is likely the one and only time each year the employee gets the opportunity to make sure the employer has the proper SSN. Not all employers give the employee a chance to verify the SSN in their payroll system before Copy A is submitted.

https://www.irs.gov/government-entities/federal-state-local-governments/truncated-taxpayer-identification-numbers You may not truncate on any forms filed with the IRS (Copy A) or with state or local governments. You cannot truncate your own identification number. These rules do not apply to Form W-2. emphasis added

Your link article was dated in January 2016, and says the rules "may" be updated, not that they have or will be updated. I am going with the current W-2 instructions since they are very clear, and since the truncate regulations defer to the specific rules for the specific document.. Emphasis added: "The regulations (TD 9675) that allow truncated taxpayer identification numbers to be used on Forms 1099-MISC may be updated to include authorization for truncated identification numbers on Forms W-2, said Nancy Rose, senior counsel in the IRS's Office of Chief Counsel. "

Just one person's thoughts... If you have an application which is important to you, will it run on an Apple product? If not, and you choose an emulator to try to get it to work, you are using the emulator to pretend you are using a Windows box, negating any perceived or real advantage to using Apple, as well as adding an extra complication and failure point. I do not create software for Apple because so few use them. Probably the same for nefarious programmers as well. But, there are those that do... so the virus argument is invalid. For me, it is never about the OS, the OS is simply a means to get to the application I need or want to use.

From the IRS W-2 instructions: Social security numbers. Do not truncate social security numbers shown on Forms W-2, W-2AS, W-2GU, and W-2VI. Social security numbers are required on Forms W-2. See Taxpayer identification numbers, later. See also Regulations section 301.6109-(4)(b)(2). Filers of other forms, such as certain Forms 1099/1098, may truncate the social security number (XXX-XX-4567) to combat identity theft.

Jack, That assumes AL actually tests the software (I doubt it) rather than the results. The IRS does not test software, just the results, and the IRS is very clear that their test data does not cover all scenarios. https://revenue.alabama.gov/incometax/software_vendors.cfm You made me look... AL first requires the software to have been IRS approved. We know now the IRS approval is not reliable. Since AL talks about their schemas, I suspect their testing is similar to the IRS. The vendor submits the RESULTS of what their software creates, and AL washes it through some sort of verification. Whether or not the vendor tests all possible scenarios, or whether or not AL requires certain scenarios to be tested is not clear from their main vendor page. Even it the IRS or a state had built some sort of test data for all possible scenarios (unlikely), how would the IRS or state actually know the data was not manually created? Don;'t for a minute think the vendor has to send their software to a tax agency and the tax agency has someone who can operate the software for testing purposes. The onus is always on the software vendor, and those using the software. In other words, your only guarantee is your own review and maybe what the software vendor provides. There is absolutely no guarantee from the taxing agency that the software they show as approved will be accurate, or was even used to make the test data which garnered the approval. Remember, the taxing agency is going to do at little as possible in their testing, as they are only looking to make their job easier (not have to manually process data).

The last paragraph tells all... The IRS is not testing the software. They test some results, based on test data they provide, and clearly state the test data does not cover all poasibilities. Not all forms or scenarios are tested, and the vendor does not have to support all forms.

https://www.irs.gov/tax-professionals/e-file-providers-partners/how-tax-preparation-software-is-approved-for-electronic-filing

SaraEA, I cannot speak for anything other than what we do. In our case, such as W-2 and W-3, the SSA approves us annually for printing the form in black and white format. They do not check for data accuracy. What they do check is a blank form being scan-able, and a form with dummy data is scan-able. For testing, they prefer all fields be filled in, and filled in to the max length we will use. So our test forms contain 99999999.99 for all figures, 20 to 30 "W" for text fields, and with ALL check boxes checked. Clearly, they have no care as to the accuracy of actual figures and text. Same for the state forms we directly print. Same for any e-data we prepare. Most tax agencies do not have an "approval" process. A few have an over the top process. Those with an approval process have one reason in mind, and it is not accuracy. It is to stay within their budget, by reducing the number of forms requiring manual handling. (There may be one or two who have approval processes to ensure they have a budget/paycheck, but that is pure speculation .) Thankfully, expertise is still needed, or we would all be looking for work. The OP is a great reminder that we have to exercise our expertise.

Maybe the issuer has nothing showing the direct payment (assuming that is what the amount was for) is ACA compliant.

Kodak (name licensed to JK Imaging) SP360. I mount it to windshield using their suction cup mount. Records to SD in 10 min (IIRC) loops. Has a setting to power on and off with the vehicle. Fun little gadget to use for many things. Stuck it on a letter when our daughter was marching in her HS band for a night parade. They twirl the letters... Underwater case is fun to use. Mount it on one of our dogs - to their harness - when we walk, for fun at first, but now for security. Plenty of loose dogs around, and we do have to pepper spray the loose ones from time to time. There are many cameras now marketed for driving. I have seen them at Costco. I like the 360cam since it shows more, including me. On the other hand, not showing me might be better if I mess up, but that is not my concern. If I mess up, I can accept that. I just want to be sure the truth comes out. Same with the cams around the house. I am really not the worrying type, but it is so easy to record things, and is a nice peace of mind.

99! The truth is, at least for me, the reverse. I use a 360deg camera when driving. I have cameras outside my house (good cameras make good neighbors, not fences). I have the ability to record my umpire gigs - yes umpires have been and do get sued, and worse yet, get assaulted. No matter the scenario, when it is clear there is a camera recording, it helps certain types behave better. Also have two cameras inside my house - but those are to check on the dogs when away .

Many phone calls are carried over the internet. VOIP, Skype, Ooma, MagicJack, etc., so one has to assume every call is over VOIP since you never know what the other party is using, and you may not even know how your own provider connects. So no, I do not worry about someone looking for a few voice mail transcriptions out of the many, nor somehow monitoring the conversation - not any more than any phone call at all. I simply assume they are not private. Something I started doing with the first phones without cords, since those were easy to monitor, accidentally or on purpose.

And I thought I really was winning a free cruise each evening :). Joking aside, several years ago I setup several google voice numbers so I can limit my cell number to family and friends. Also works great for working from out of the office. The other benefit is gv filters calls, and can route known spam numbers to a spam folder. Can also receive texts as emails, and the missed or ignored call transcription is good enough to get by (comcast is a little better at transcribing). Still get random direct to cell spam calls, but unless from family or friends, or is a forward from a GV number within the time frame I setup in GV (business days and hours), they go to voicemail without ringing. Also use one gv number strictly to give out as a business text message number. I get the message via email, and reply via email as well. Easily limits the hours I get "beeped".

Jack - Nope, problem not prevented. You still have to practice safe hex. Received a new computer (late '80's) where the hard drive already had something nefarious on it. It was the person/store who put together the computer who caused the problem. Could get something internally, via using some sort of media for backup (assuming you are backing up). Safe hex is the only prevention. No software or hardware action can protect you.

I am a big proponent of getting a new PC when there is a new OS. The odds of any OS/Hardware issues are much less. For the most part, any off the shelf PC is going to be fine, unless you are gaming. Amazon has been fine for me. No matter what source, if it does not fail soon after beginning use, it is likely not to fail for a long time. Leave it on for the first week or two, not sleeping or hibernating, will fairly test the hardware. If one is inclined, you can run some stress test software as well. I do add a video card, so I can have multiple monitors. I like smaller multiple monitors over large screens, given what a person's eyes can easily scan. The key for me is to keep the tops of the monitors at or lower than my eye level to avoid neck pain at end of day. Portrait is easiest on the eyes, but landscape can be handy for something with ling lines (like program code). -- For work, I use an old computer. It is plenty fast, and more closely simulated what our customers might be using. I have W10 and W7 via dual boot. The box is probably 10 years old now. I have personal and other PC's, newer and older, which I can use when needed. The only time I wish it was faster is for a long program compile, but it is still just seconds, versus tens of minutes in the "old" days.

For those who want to go at it on their own, I would add that if the "reason" is something not black and white in the code or examples, an hour SSDI attorney consult might be wise, just to increase the chance of first time success. There are many "new" disabilities which may not perfectly align with their internal items and may "throw off" whomever reviews the application. If there is any doubt, get representation. (See the last paragraph.) Getting medical records from what is likely several sources may seem daunting. The cheapest way is to get their primary care doc to make the requests from all other docs, since these are usually done on a courtesy basis. Give it time. If speed is an issue, then you are better off face to face at each medical provider. 2-3 years back may be enough, provided the issue is shown in that time frame. SSDI attorneys can only get a certain percentage of the "back pay" (the first check covering the application date through the approval date, plus certain expenses. This is public information which can be confirmed (I cannot remember the specifics at the moment, might even have a dollar cap.). IIRC the SSA regulates this strictly. Hourly/Daily life with a friend or family member who has challenges may be more than enough to deal with - any time you can share the work load is most welcome. It may not be a immediate financial need, or even medical coverage need, it may be a need to set someone up should their current caregiver not be available, or to access services to get the best and fullest support available. If the applicant is the one who is disabled, I would always suggest an attorney as daily life is already tough enough.

When communication goes awry, and I want to see if it was me, I used to have my spouse read the messages, now it is my daughter. I have to find someone new every now and again, as they get jaded (as well as protective of me) if I use them too much... The jaded/protective is why my spouse and daughter never watch me umpire any more (our boys can, since they are also umpires) because they take what the crowd says personally. Plus my wife is my worst heckler! I suppose the real "issue" for most here, as well as me, is we have no insulation. We are the ones doing the work, and have to hear comments regarding our work. Our customers know that, and make an assumption we not only remember every thing about them, but can understand intent. When there is a go between, folks tend to be clearer so the "message" gets through.

Not even close to the worse Business communication has gone "text" and "twitter" for far too many. Daily, I get communications asking for help, but no actual question. Messages saying they are having a problem, but no hint as to the problem. I spend more time trying to ferret out the issue than answering the issue, with more than a fair amount of the issues answered by the error or other message already shown on their screen. There is also a fair amount who ask for help, then argue that the reply cannot be correct. It is what it is, and rather than be frustrated, I have to remember to adapt. Toughest part of the job!

The area bar assn will likely have a web site listing specialties. This is a definite specialty. But, unless the person has already been denied, or is not comfortable preparing the application, or it is not a clear cut case, they can do it themselves first, then obtain an attorney if denied. It is not as horrible a process as one imagines or hears. The "clock" starts with the first application, which in some cases, needs to be timed for the best benefit. I was in the same boat. The atty we met with gave this advice, that we seemed more than capable of making the initial app, that it will likely be approved (legitimate case with multiple factors), and they would be more than willing to help if an appeal was needed. ON the other hand, the compensation is strictly governed, so if the person just wants someone else to handle it, and the attorney agrees, it might be worth it to the applicant.

Don't read into it at all, ask them to elaborate. No reason to spend time trying to answer something when something was not asked... I get something similar many times a day in many forms. "I have a problem." "Can you help me?" "I am seeing an error message?" I stopped spending time trying to guess and now just answer with a standard pre built reply. The reply is fairly long, since it has to cover all sorts of unasked questions, but it is an accurate reply.

Every 2 hours. The frequency of your backup equals the amount of time (beyond the restore) you are willing to spend retyping data. I am willing to retype 2 hours of data. I am not willing to retype an entire day's work, let alone a week's work.

What Jack said. Again, Carbonite and others DEFAULT to only backup certain common folders. You CAN add additional files and folders to what Carbonite backs up. If the folder's permissions, or your user permissions do not allow the file to be backed up, you have bigger issues with using that folder.

Carbonite, and most third party backup software, defaults to the more common folders. It CAN be set to backup other locations as well. They also skip certain file types (the last time I checked, movie files were not included by default), even in folders they are set to backup. The "flaw: in such systems IS the impression that no user configuration is needed after installation. Most don't find out they were not including other folders until it is too late. The same thing happens when an "expert" moves data to a new computer for you, they only move the common locations. The missing parts of most backup routines is storing a copy or two at a remote location AND routinely testing your backups by restoring them and making sure you were able to restore what you actually intended to backup. It is a double whammy when you need a backup, think you were backing up, only to discover what you can restore, if anything, is not what you actually needed. That is when I get called, asking if we were sending data to some secret undocumented location in the cloud, or sending data to our own computers (which we do not do).

An unexpected error is usually some sort of major fail, for which there is no common message to show. Consider such message as neither the application nor operating system having any idea how to gracefully get past the error, usually caused by a programming error in the current application, or another which happens to be running. I would not count on anything working properly after closing the message.