lbbwest

"You can please some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not please all of the people all of the time." Abraham Lincoln It's the same whether we are discussing chit chat, political agendas, etc. I don't particularly enjoy the meal agendas but they don't annoy me. I already have the option of not reading a particular poster, as Lincoln so wisely stated any group is going to disagree; any "chat room" will disagree about content. Bad words don't bother me, political rhetoric does. So long as there is a boss, creator or moderator there will be choices made. Individual posters have the option not to participate. Ironically the "tax only" forum offerred by ATX (pre CCH) was never as lively as the "open board" continued to be. So now we are voting on having the creator creating ANOTHER tax only board, my chrystal ball which is usually in for repairs tells me that the "chat forum" will continue to have the most postings, and those of us addicted to our own words will frequent both; many times answering the same question posted twice. Is it just me or have most of us....???? BEEN THERE, DONE THAT? In my never humble opinion lbb

Folks, you know that I do like some 'chatter', jokes, etc. here, and from time to time contribute a joke, puzzle, etc. But I have to say that as the work load gets heavy, I'm finding it a bit hard to find time to read the board for all the clutter of posts that really do not contribute anything but a 'yeah, I agree' or a run-on of a joke that has already gotten old. Please, could we cut it back just a little bit? I'm not saying it does not have a place, it does. But too much of anything spoils it. And especially, with all the sarcastic meaningless replies to sincere questions. Please, if you don't like a question, just skip it, OK? -------------------- KC THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO COMPLAIN ABOUT TAXES ARE MEN AND WOMEN!

Topic 756 - Employment Taxes for Household Employees Household employees include housekeepers, maids, baby-sitters, gardeners, and others who work in or around your private residence as your employees. Repairmen, plumbers, contractors, and other business people who work for you as independent contractors, are not your employees. Household workers are your employees if you can control not only the work they do but how they do it. If you pay a household employee cash wages of more than the amount specified by law in a tax year, you generally must withhold social security and Medicare taxes from all cash wages you pay to that employee. (Cash wages include wages you pay by check or money order.) Unless you prefer to pay your employe's share of social security and Medicare taxes from your own funds, you should withhold a certain percentage set by law from each payment of cash wages. The specified dollar amount and percentages can be found under the topic "Do You Need To Pay Employment Taxes?" in Publication 926 (PDF). Instead of paying this amount to your employee, pay it to the IRS with a matching amount for your share of the taxes. If you pay your employe's share of social security and Medicare taxes from your own funds, these amounts must be included in the employe's wage for income tax purposes. However, they are not counted as social security and Medicare wages or as Federal unemployment wages. However, do not withhold or pay these taxes from wages you pay to: your spouse, your child who is under age 21, your parent, unless an exception is met; or an employee who is under age 18 at any time during the year unless performing household work is the employe's principal occupation. If the employee is a student, providing household work is not considered to be his or her principal occupation.

Eli, I don't have time to look for a cite for you (even though you are my favorite poster) if you start researching every item that other preparers "allow" you won't have time to do tax returns or see that child of yours. E.G. H & R Block ads in my area show a magician & clown bragging about deducting their unreimbursed employee expenses.....so clients ASS u ME that their workboots are a deduction.

I think I got it. IF they had taken the state sales tax deduction then their state refund would have nothing to do with their Schedule A from the previous year. Thank you for making me think that through. I told you I wasn't the brightest bulb in the box. lbb

That doesn't sound correct. If taxpayers are allowed EITHER Standard Deduction or Itemized Deduction AND taxpayers can choose EITHER state sales tax or state income tax as part of their itemized deductions; AND taxpayers only have to report as income the amount of their state income tax refund that contributed on a pro-rata basis to the itemizations in excess of the standard; WHY would they only have the claim the difference between the sales tax deduction? The sales tax deduction CAN BE an actual number instead of derived from the chart...AND it has to contribute to the excess of itemizations over the standard. Not the brightest bulb in the box doesn't get it. Please explain. lbb

Go to the Special Allocation Worksheet within the K-1 Form (tab is at the bottem of your screen) and check the appropriate box. Good Luck!! lbb

I think the confusion was created because of the rulings regarding LAWSUITS. This wasn't a lawsuit; it was a complaint made to the State, the state inquired and the company paid the back vacation pay. "It was from a settlement when he filed a complaint with the state."

I already told the poster it was taxable... "Vacation pay. Vacation pay is subject to withholding as if it were a regular wage payment. When vacation pay is in addition to regular wages for the vacation period, treat it as a supplemental wage payment."

Bascially. "I thought the offset was due to the Social Security kicking in for only over the amount of what workmans compensation paid." Workman's Comp AND Social Security Disability are NOT going to pay for the same period for the SAME disability; (that's a double dip.) Both are slow to pay but Social Security is even slower than most noncontested WC cases. Let me give you a blatent example; real life usually doesn't come this clean; Joe Disabled can't work because he hurt his leg at work; he fell. At first WC kicks in because it appears to be work related. It turns out that Joe has degenerative arthritis and his balance is bad and is going to get worse. NOT work related. Social Security Disability is RETROACTIVE to the date he couldn't work. Because it was NOT work related and the WC insurance PAID Joe, they submit a claim to SS. SS says well, Joe ALREADY got the money from WC Ins. so we are going to send it back to them. IF Joe had not received WC insurance the retroactive amount would have gone directly to him. Does THIS clarify anything? lbb

It should have been reported on a W2, report it on Line 7 with a 4137 for him to pay his half of the SS/Medicare. lbb

It's taxable for Federal & possibly State HOWEVER, public college DON'T withhold or pay on the Social Security/Medicare portion for students. lbb

If you read my previous post, I've ALREADY explained the possibilities. lbb

I'm the dim bulb in the box, I don't understand you, please use imaginary numbers (not the math variety the not real variety to explain.) It sounds like.. you are saying client received $10,000 in worker's comp (non taxable) and $1,000 in Social Security Benefits, but Box 5 of Social Security 1099 says $11,000; so the system is wanting to tax them on $11,000 instead of $1,000. Is that scenario correct? If it IS correct you have to research the flow of funds. If the social security is disability there may have been a disagreement between the worker's comp and SS, and worker's comp won. If it is Retirement benefits could be the same problem. General Motors for instance pays worker's comp UNTIL Soc. Sec. disability kicks in; (many times it kicks in retroactively) and then, their insurance company is "paid back." As always the correct answer is "it depends." Not enough information to properly assess the situation. lbb

Another county heard from... Those commercials that are rampant this time of year....is the big, bad IRS bothering you poor innocent taxpayers? Call 1-800-WeRSCUM and we will help you. They neglect to mention in cases of trust fund fraud the innocent taxpayer told the truly innocent employee I am taking this badly needed money out of your paycheck and sending it to the government...(JUST KIDDING.) The government has no choice but to honor the truly innocent taxpayer's W2 and us stupid law abiding taxpayers get to pay the freight...AGAIN. How much intelligence does it take for an employer to realize that the money he takes away from the employees NEVER BELONGED TO HIM? The reason the 100% penalty was created was because the owner was misdirecting the employee/government funds to his own use. Unfortunately too many times to the local bar/casino. It created the phrase "TOO STUPID TO BE IN BUSINESS." To quote Ron White "You Can't Fix STUPID." Good luck with your client, be sure to get a retainer up front, and don't do any work until the check clears. If he is willing to defraud the government and his employees it won't hurt his moral compass to defraud you.

I always get a Dr. Statement and retain in file; I take the entire amount as she is not able to feed herself etc. lbb

The IRS would not be the entity "to question" the disability; it would be the Social Security Administration. Since the taxpayer doesn't have the "option" of deciding whether or not to claim his earned income; you as the preparer of course are obligated to legally minimize his liability; which would include any applicable credits. lbb

Happy Birthday!

In Michigan there is a "renter's credit" based on percentages/ratios of income to rent paid, ALL household income included. Last year young couple unmarried with baby each went to well known tax prep chain, EACH claimed total rent paid EACH received substantial credit. Were upset that there was no credit for 2007 as "we get it every year." I responded with you told the State of MI you paid AND the State of MI he paid... I don't think they will be back next year. lbb

Earned income credit DOES NOT go with dependancy exemption (neccessarily) take a quick look at this year's criteria to make sure your client qualifies, last year the child was input separately for earned income credit in ATX when not a dependant. I haven't looked at it for this year yet. lbb

You have just given new meaning to the phrase "YOU SUCK." :)

You are wrong, it looks like the sky in Northern Michigan.

I was the technical support for the legal team in a rather ugly divorce. The now ex-spouse was a CPA AND CFP in Fl & MI. He had taught MACPA & AICPA CPEs. He had three sets of tax returns, (1) Credit Card Companies (2) IRS/States and (3) Local Banks. Additionally he kited monies from the defined pension plan to the business & personal accounts. The court was baffled and said his businesses weren't worth anything and allowed him to keep all business assets at a marital value of Zero, and sold all personal marital assets at auction. He purchased at auction the lake house, the commercial rental property, the jag, the MG, etc. etc. His wife lost half her pension from the school system. His ex-wife turned all documents over to the SEC, the IRS, the MACPA, the AICPA, FBI and nothing was done. He was indicted by the Florida Department of Commerce last year for misappropriating funds from investor's portfolios but nothing was ever done on the bank or tax fraud. lbb