redux

I don't think anyone was questioning your integrity, at least I wasn't. Thanks for sharing.

This is scary, I agree with jainen on this one. I think this scheme would flop and not only would he still have no SS he (and likely YOU) would be in further trouble for designing such a scheme. I also think it is so revealing that this "client" couldn't give a whip about contributing to the SS "system" until he realizes that his lack of contributions affects nearly no one but him...now he's REALLY interested in "doing the right thing."

IR-2007-109, May 31, 2007 WASHINGTON — The Internal Revenue Service today alerted taxpayers to the latest versions of an e-mail scam intended to fool people into believing they are under investigation by the agency’s Criminal Investigation division. The e-mail purporting to be from IRS Criminal Investigation falsely states that the person is under a criminal probe for submitting a false tax return to the California Franchise Tax Board. The e-mail seeks to entice people to click on a link or open an attachment to learn more information about the complaint against them. The IRS warned people that the e-mail link and attachment is a Trojan Horse that can take over the person’s computer hard drive and allow someone to have remote access to the computer. http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=170894,00.html

Unfortunately you're right KC, and that's what so many of the speeches of many candidates are about,...trickery. It used to be called lying. I'm not smart enough to know the answer, but doesn't it just frost you when you're discussing some upcoming election with another and they get around to stating for whom they intend to vote, but when you ask why...they can't tell you, because they have no constructive reason. They have a friend who heard that their great uncle's mechanic has a customer who heard that their brother was going to vote for that person so if unk is going to vote that way, so am I.

Well, without knowing more about exactly what she is proposing it would be difficult, if not impossible, to comment here. I rarely read or pay any attention to her since she is so repulsive and plastic. She seems to be a class A politician though, in that she'll say, do or pander whoever and whatever she must in order to further her career. Of course, I realize that she's not alone in that respect, many people running for office do the same. Bill was a master at it, which is why she is being led by him to do it now...it worked for him, so what the hey.

I'm sorry to hear about your e-services problems, it is frustrating at best. Did you try the link I posted above? Other than trying to contact them, I would suggest that perhaps you might want to think about cleaning out your cookies. May be there is a corrupt one associated with the e-services. Perhaps other more computer proficient "geeks" would like to comment on my supposition.

I cannot duplicate your problem, however, I do know that passwords on that system must be changed at periodic intervals...six months I think. Could it be a password problem? Here is the log-in page I use. https://la1.www4.irs.gov/pub/rup_login/?TYP...on$%2ehtml

Welcome to the forum. Erc is the responsible party for the creation of this site. Also, see the donate button above.

My best snappy comeback.....Oh Yeah!

I know that once we're all licensed with the new pending legislation, there will never again be any fraud committed in the tax industry...right? Oops, these folks were already licensed, how could this have happened? What went wrong? I'll bet they even took CPEs in ethics. I don't understand it. Indictment: Sept. 11 Used in Tax Fraud Wednesday May 30, 5:30 PM EDT NEW YORK (AP) — A former top Internal Revenue Service lawyer and three other Ernst & Young partners reduced taxes for Americans making $10 million or more with a fraud that even used the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks to disguise their lies, according to an indictment charging the men. The four current and former partners of the giant accounting firm were arrested Wednesday and charged with fraud and other crimes relating to tax shelters that were devised beginning in early 1998, the indictment unsealed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan said. http://finance.myway.com/jsp/nw/nwdt_rt_to...-d8peuqh00&

Half truths abound here. Of course, if the Dems retain control in 08, the onus will be on them to do something about the expiring (not scheduled) tax cuts of 2010. And, don't forget to ignore the fact that it was the present administration that implemented the tax cuts to begin with. If I restore and give away 2000 bicycles and then quit doing so...I should be condemed for not continuing, strange logic. The 2007 budget that was signed into law in February was one negotiated by the NEW Congress. See: "Domestic Funding Increased Under Approved 2007 Federal Budget The Roundtable on Religion and Social Welfare Policy By: Anne Farris, Roundtable Washington Correspondent First published: February 20, 2007 After missing a budgetary deadline months ago, Congress last week passed a $464 billion spending bill that included more money for education, housing and health care programs that benefit the people assisted by religious organizations. The bill, signed into law by President Bush last week after both House and Senate leaders negotiated a final agreement, pulls together nine unfinished spending bills for almost all government operations except homeland security. Government services would have ceased if Congress had not acted last week. The bill covers spending for fiscal year 2007, which began on October 1. The bill should have been completed months ago. But Congress was at a standstill on its passage, and instead passed a series of continuing resolutions to keep the government running." http://www.religionandsocialpolicy.org/new...cle.cfm?id=6066

This statement will come as no revelation to many of us, but I just feel like saying it. There are people in our country who insist on sticking their head in the proverbial sand. By doing so, they can somehow justify their refusal to see the obvious. Many of us wish things were different. However, refusing to see the obvious doesn't make their assessment of things different than they really are...after all, they're voicing an opinion with only half the facts. Sticking one's head in the proverbial sand may be an attempt at hiding and could be akin to refusing to disclose anything about one's self on this and other boards. Sometimes remaining anonymous provides one with the psychological boost needed in order to make reckless claims. Anonymity, it seems, gives some people the impetus they need to make statements containing half truths. That is not to imply that all persons who don't disclose their stats on this and other boards are hiding something, some people simply want to limit their identities for other reasons and that is perfectly understandable and acceptable.

John, you do just fine on how you state things here, no need to change a thing. Most of us understand what you say and why.

You're right John, I guess I just lost sight of reality there for a while.

It’s pretty clear that a three month vacation is MORE important to the Dems than all their rhetoric since last November, about a date certain for troop withdrawal. Isn’t it interesting and very revealing, how the Dems claimed that adding a date certain for troop withdrawal from Iraq to the war funding bill was the most important element ever. They went through the motions with a recent funding bill even though they knew that Bush would veto it. More clearly, they completely wasted their efforts with that bill fully knowing it would not become law. Once the veto occurred, they, through Pelosi, claimed that they would be working diligently on a new bill and it WOULD include a date certain for withdrawal because they were tired of giving Bush a blank check with no oversight and no prospect of ending this war. There has been a change of heart, I guess. The latest bill provides the $120 Billion in war funding (and $20 or so Billion for pork barrel items) in a so-called compromise bill. (Bush said he wanted a clean bill – no pork barrel). It makes one wonder why the change of heart on the Dems part when they were so adamant about their stand…oh yes, I forgot, they want to go on vacation for the summer and out of the goodness of their hearts, they don’t want to leave DC with the war unfunded. Never mind that 300 or 400 more troops will die while Congress is on vacation, that’s unimportant to them…at vacation time. They even have the audacity to declare the troop withdrawal will continue AFTER they return. So it seems that they’re telling us how important their position is and how strongly they feel about troop withdrawal…as long as that position doesn’t interfere with their scheduled vacation, how disgusting. By the way, is anyone of you going to get three months off with pay this summer (no teachers need respond). Let’s see, 100 Senators and 435 Congressmen at roughly $165,200 per year = $88,382,000, and of course the leaders of both houses make more than that + benefits. So that’s $22,095,500 for summer vacation for these folks, plus whatever they charge us for their travel around the world on "fact finding" missions. Now don’t go telling me what a tough job it is, they all knew what the job was about when they spent millions applying for a job that pays $165,200.

It's amazing how wrong you can be, I remember Carter all to well. If you look closer you'll see that I didn't "quote" Carter...I used a likeness of his statement about Bush in my assessment of this Congress. My statement had NOTHING to do with praise for Carter. I was simply using his latest faux pas in which he publicly criticized Bush and said "he was the worst President in History."

It is so sad, John but I'm afraid you're right when you say their attitude is "This is the way we do business. You're only a customer - get used to it!"

No harm done KC - I'm just pushing your foot. There is certainly nothing wrong with a little redundancy just as there is nothing wrong with saying the same thing twice or more than once. As we all know there are many redundancies such as "free gift;" "close proximity;" "lying about taxes." Some, of course, are more subtle than others.

I can't say what the 1040 Office package cost last year. This year it is $595 - $59.50 (early discount)+ $69.00 shipping = $604.50. Also this year for that price you get only 100 "free" e-files, after which it is $3 Fed and $2 State extra for each return. There may well be other missing research tools too. Unless you kept a copy of last year's sales brochures for the various packages, we'll never know what is missing. Missing items, of course, is a method of price increase, as we all know. As far as them not telling you everything, I have to say...it's all there on their web site in writing.

Fred Flintstone? By the way KC, is it redundant to say "While I don't agree with all of your points, as I am sure you don't agree with all of mine," If you don't agree with all my points...that implies that I don't agree with all your points...doesn't it?

John the contract, in this case, is an implied one created by the offer and subsequent acceptance, not by any printed agreement. I agree, that many would threaten to sue but not many would. I would not be surprised, however, to see a class action filed in addition to many individual suits. The standard for breach of a contract such as this, is to put the injured in the position they would have been had the contract been performed. Treble damages ( three times the amount spent) for nonperformance is not unusual plus actual loss of business, if any. There also might be punitive assessments. I agree, it is a tough row to hoe, but alternative vendors have nothing, or little, to do with a contract breach. I still do not think any company would purposely subject themselves to the possibility of such a situation I describe. I think they would more likely make subtle changes in the internal workings of the program that would make it less desirable and then tout their more expensive programs that have ALL the bells and whistles. These changes would not violate any such contract that we're discussing but would serve the purpose that you describe...selling the more expensive program. Time will tell, it's such a same that we feel the way we do about this or any company. I wish you all the best in your software choice. Please keep us posted on your decision.

John, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the scenario you present comes to fruition. Isn't it the "greed" factor in all its purity that is coupled with the lack of trust we have in this company that makes us even consider such a scenario? Alternatively, we should consider that once they have made an offer, we have accepted, and consideration is present (our payment) they are obliged by the law of contracts to complete the contract with their performance (their consideration - the delivery of the goods). It seems illogical that they would subject themselves to possible lawsuits by any or all of those harmed by such foolish action as intentional non-performance. While their pocket book may be bulging, being sued by hundreds (or more) businesses whose preparation business suffered financially as a result of a contract violation may not be a thing their pocket book could stand, not to mention the adverse publicity.

I have come to the same conclusion. After trying the many demo's out there, I feel that the "forms" input is the best approach...as opposed to the alternative input methods available. While some are, at least price wise, attractive, the ease of use is not. Navigating from input screen to a form is awkward at best. I know also that using a new method of input would eventually lead to a feeling of awkwardness for the form input method. It's all in how you look at it, the fly said as he landed on the mirror. I'm not at all happy with the new regime at ATX but, I don't think I'd be happy if I shoot myself in the foot either. So for 2007, I think I'll overlook the new company's arrogance and re-enlist. While I don't need to apologize to anyone for "sticking" with ATX, I don't want anyone to look at my decision as an endorsement either. We each have to do what we feel is best for our respective situation, including full disclosure of the software we're using (under oath, of course). :P

I agree with Zeke's thoughtful assessment of the greed in this country. But, you know, To use one of Jimmy Carter's recent assessments of The president, I believe this Congress is the worst in history. Tell me one productive thing they have accomplished. After all the rhetoric during the last election campaign that they would do this or that...they have done exactly ZERO. With the very limited time Congress actually works in any normal week, plus the vacations and holidays, and with their total obsession with hearings associated with the Bush administration when they are at work, there is simply no time left to conduct the business of the Country. I firmly believe we should be out of Iraq too. It is a no win situation for us there. As soon as we leave, no matter when that is, there will be another dictator take over and we will have accomplished nothing except to have cut short the lives of so many young Americans. Spend the war money on developing alternative energy sources and create an independent America as far as oil is concerned. But greed is alive an well here in our once great America. Greed has caused us to squander so many of our resources, including our reputation around the world. I agree that Bush has blown it as a President, he has trouble seeing the forest for the trees. I am totally disappointed with him and his policies. That said, I can't seem to get my mind around what the Dem's think they're going to accomplish with all this beating of the Bush. Their non-productive "occupation" of Capitol Hill has hurt this country nearly as much as Bush and his dangerous policies. In fact it wouldn't surprise me too much if Pelosi (who is actually running the country at this point) put out a hit on Bush and Cheney so she could beat Hildabeast as President. WOW- Did I say all that....one would think I was upset with the present administration...

I have their original letter to me in front of me as we speak. It clearly states "You must order by June 30 to get the 10% discount." The email today is for entry into the contest if you renew by May 31 2007...you would get the 10% discount AND be entered into the contest IF YOU MENTION THE "CODE."