Jump to content
ATX Community

Richcpaman

Members
  • Content Count

    832
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

About Richcpaman

  • Rank
    ATXaholics Anonymous

Profile Information

  • State
    MD

Recent Profile Visitors

3,550 profile views
  1. Nice Chart^^^^ TaxTools had a worksheet as well. *IF* you had a beginning basis, the worksheet did the rest. Rich
  2. If the replacement property had no basis, then the sale is all taxable. No 8824 needed. Just the 4797. Rich
  3. BT: Generally, a S Corp can not own another S Corp. A C-Corp can own 100% of an S-Corp. And its earnings are passed through and taxed to the C-Corp. Why one would want to do that, I do not know... BHoffman's article addresses this issue. Rich
  4. It doesn't matter to me. But it would be nice if they printed it about 4 lines down from the top..... Rich
  5. This line: "but by the end of the conversation she was laughing " after a few minutes with you, I would presume we would all be laughing.... Rich
  6. Is it a rounding issue? What do you think the difference is? Rich
  7. What if the Farmer is still actively farming? You can collect SS benefits, but still be working the farm. And we can only exclude CRP from SE? If so, report on Sch F for matching, but not taxed, and then move to line 21? (the OLD line 21...;) Rich
  8. Virginia Voted Friday to "de-couple" from the Feds with itemizing, but MD voted to stay in the stone age. Rich
  9. If, playing devils advocate here: The business owners are contributing to a an account labeled SEP-IRA, but they are only putting in the $5,500/$6,500 amount per the IRA rules, and NOT deducting it on the Corporate return, and only on the 1040, then they just need to relabel the account. If they are deducting the SEP contributions on their SCorp return, and not contributing the same % to the eligible employee's, then they are in deep kimchi. Rich
  10. I use the engagement letter because it keeps the IRS out of my hair. The IRS dislikes Engagement letters more than any one else. The Engagement letter clearly puts it on the taxpayer, and not on ME for their fraud. Or for their inability to give me info in a timely manner, or why I did year X, but no year Y and Z (when they didn't send me anything) or why state W was not filed for them. I use the engagement letter EVERY Year so that you can say that you didn't read it one year, but EVERY year for 10 years? I use the Engagement letter to satisfy a "block" that gets checked somewhere. Even if I never get sued. But if I do, it get checked. It DOES limit my legal liability. I may pay, but it might help save as well. I use the Engagement Letter to establish the parameters of MY STAFF and MY behavior going forward. Not the clients. If I do not like what the client is doing, I fire them. And then I do not have a problem anymore. Rich
  11. H: When we installed ATX 2017 on our server in 2018, we then workstation installed several computers that were in the same building. Using the local network that happened to be wireless. When we installed the Hamachi VPN software in 2019, we were able to access the ATX2017 like we always had. That is sweet. We had moved the server computer to a new physical location away from these computers. However, in 2019, with ATX 2018, we have installed the local workstations without a problem. Now that we have to install to he distant computers, we hope the Hamachi VPN can support that. Otherwise, we might have to carry the distant computers to the other office, locally install the workstations, and hope it works like 2017. And you thought ATX tech support didn't understand things... Rich
  12. ILL: If a "new" client comes in, and presents Scenario #2, then you have to deal with the lack of compensation, and it has nothing to do with QBI. The S/H has not taken a salary and should be taking something. If it is an existing client, then you should have dealt with it in the past. What other clients have this problem? If the client is refusing to take a reasonable salary, then the whole QBI issue is moot. You probably don't want them as a client. They are going to cheat elsewhere as well, and make it all your fault when they get caught. Rich
  13. Bubba: Are you running ATX or Qbooks over a VPN? Not just moving a file back and forth, but with a computer with ATX on it in one location, and then operating from the remote computer with out remote desktop software? Rich
  14. In the first line, of the first post, it mentioned over 3 BILLION hacks.. The Equifax heist gave them all the keys. There will not be a system that can't be compromised.... It will just be a matter of time. This year, MFA. Next year.. MFB and the year after that, MFC, Etc. We should be lobbying Congress to change the rules to remove liability from folks that get hacked for less than, say, 10k records. If you have between 10k and 1 million, your liability is this, and above that, then your liability is TBD. I am not that worried about my practice being hacked, yes, I could be one of the unlucky ones, but, I think it is much more likely that ATX or CCH gets all our client records hacked... Rich
  15. I am using remote desktops now. The problem is you have to have a computer at both ends dedicated to use this way. The VPN is there to reduce some of this, as you can access different things on the server, etc., in the remote location. The problem now, is that I will have 4 users on the local office, and 4-5 users in the remote office, which means 13 actual inputs to the server. I need to have a strong server to do this, and keep the speed bearable. No one has tried ATX over a VPN, I presume.
×
×
  • Create New...