kcjenkins

Eric, if it stays around for a while, I am sure we will get used to it. Just don't expect us to rush into it. It's hard enough to deal with all the changes in tax code, without having to learn a bunch of new hardware issues. We'd rather wait until we are sure it is going to last, first. Just saying................LOL

It is Freedom Outpost, not Frontier Post. If you can't even get that right, how much respect can we be expected to grant you? That video link sounded really intelligent to me, I did not hear a single false statement in it. I can see where a liberal might not LIKE what she said, but not liking it does not make it wrong.

Do you not realize that the use of the term 'tea bagger' is both rude and insulting? Please keep your language above that level in future. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=teabagger

I wonder if they will still offer the test, just as not a 'required' test, so as to be ready if they manage to get that started again?

I'd base the FMV on the cash surrender value now, since it is only now that he has actually 'gotten' the policy. Misc Income Line 21 seems the most logical place to report it. I've never had that sort of situation, hopefully someone who has will speak up and share the outcome.

Given some of the events going on now, from tornados to Boston, etc, when I came across these it seemed really timely.

I think she may well do that.

5 apps to help you in an emergency One the best ways to get through an emergency situation is to prepare in advance. The right supplies and planning can mean the difference between life and death. In addition to your usual collection of emergency items, a smartphone or tablet can be a valuable tool, especially loaded with these emergency apps. Emergency Medical Center Locator (Free; iOS) - Find the nearest and most advanced specialized emergency rooms in the country using this app. Specialized hospitals include trauma, stroke, eye, pediatric, cardiac and burn. All you need to do is enter your ZIP code and you will be directed to the nearest center via Google Maps. American Red Cross Shelters (Free; iOS) - Run by The American Red Cross National Shelter System, which contains information on 60,000 potential disaster facilities, this app provides you with real-time information about its shelters across the U.S. You can view shelter details, such as capacity and current population, address and location. If you need a place to take refuge, this app can help you find it. iTriage (Free; iOS, Android) - Developed by two emergency room doctors, iTriage lets you search medical symptoms and learn about potential causes. It isn't a replacement for a medical professional, but it can help you keep someone alive until help is found. The app will also tell you the nearest medical facilities and provide turn-by-turn directions, ER wait times, and includes emergency hotlines for instant advice from nurses and doctors. HelpBridge (Free; iOS, Android) - This app lets you quickly send emails and texts to loved ones to let them know you are OK. Or, you can post an emergency message to your Facebook Timeline. These forms of communication can also include your location, if specified. Iams Vet 24/7 (Free; iOS, Android) - Health care isn't limited to just humans. Our furry friends and animal companions need veterinary care just like we need medical care. The Iams Vet 24/7 app lets pet owners get immediate access to animal hospitals and clinics. Results are filtered by distance from the location of the phone, so your phone's GPS will need to be activated. - See more at: http://www.komando.com/apps/category.aspx?id=14019&utm_medium=nl&utm_source=notd&utm_content=2013-05-22-article_10-cta&page=2#sthash.9WWxg51R.dpuf

The FBI received a tip that a Facebook user was seeking to pay for an assassination of someone in Cleveland, Ohio. An agent posed as a hit man and corresponded online with the individual. The Facebook user, later identified as Meredith Lowell, 28, allegedly told the agent she wanted him to kill someone -- anyone -- who was wearing fur outside the Cleveland Heights-University Heights Public Library. "I am paying you to kill one person wearing fur who is 12 or older (but hopefully at least 14 years, however 12 years old or older is fine)," Lowell allegedly wrote in a message. The report also indicates Lowell wanted to be present for the killing so that she could hand out anti-fur industry literature. A psychological report found her mentally incompetent to stand trial and not capable of being rehabilitated to competency, so the judge freed her. (MS/Cleveland Plain Dealer) WHO IS MORE INSANE, THIS WOMAN, OR THE JUDGE? OR THE LAW THAT ALLOWS THIS? AND YES, IN THE 'REAL WORLD' THERE WOULD BE REAL COSTS FOR DOING SUCH A THING.

In 2011, Massachusetts "overhauled" its ethics guidelines for legislators. The State Ethics Commission has finally come up with new training for lawmakers stressing transparency and accountability. At least, that's what they say the training emphasized: the training session was closed to the public and reporters who showed up to observe. "Can I tell you --" Ethics Commission Chairman Charles Swartwood III said, interrupting himself when he was asked why ethics training of public servants was held behind closed doors. "Don't argue with me." When asked to identify himself for the record, the public official replied, "I'm not saying, because that's a private matter." When lawmakers left the session, they said they were "more confused than when they entered," because the ethics officials contradicted themselves when discussing the new regulations. (RC/Boston Herald) ALL POLITICIANS SEEM TO BE THE SAME, DON'T THEY?

Point taken!

OK by me, but lawyers would actually love that, because the simpler the law, the more ways they can argue it should be 'interpreted'. LOL

But, Tom, if you were a member you'd be in a position to advocate for them to do as you wish. As a non-member you have no say in how they spend their money.

Well, while we wish for some change that makes life better, how about a law that there can be NO MORE LAWS, WE HAVE ENOUGH LAWS. So what that means is, for any new law you want to pass, you have to repeal and totally eliminate some old law. (Of course, I'd prefer That you had to eliminate 2 old fo every new, myself, because I think we have WAY TOO MANY NOW. When we got down to half as many, then it could go to 1 for 1. LOL )

here is a link to that info on Galveston county, VERY INTERESTING. http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba514 Below is just part of it, I'd suggest you read the whole thing. Galveston County: A Model for Social Security Reform The current debate over Social Security reform is reminiscent of the discussions that occurred in Galveston County, Texas, in 1980, when county workers were offered a retirement alternative to Social Security: At the time they reacted with keen interest and some knee-jerk fear of the unknown. But after 24 years, folks here can say unequivocally that when Galveston County pulled out of the Social Security system in 1981, we were on the road to providing our workers with a better deal than Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal. The Galveston Plan. In 1979, many county workers were concerned about the soundness of Social Security, as many people are today. We could either stay with it - and its inevitable tax increases and higher retirement ages - or find a better way. We sought an "alternative plan" that provided the same or better benefits, required no tax increases and was risk-free. Furthermore, we wanted the benefits to be like a savings account that could be passed on to family members upon death. Our plan, put together by financial experts, was a "banking model" rather than an "investment model." To eliminate the risks of the up-and-down stock market, workers' contributions were put into conservative fixed-rate guaranteed annuities, rather than fluctuating stocks, bonds or mutual funds. Our results have been impressive: We've averaged an annual rate of return of about 6.5 percent over 24 years. And we've provided substantially better benefits in all three Social Security categories: retirement, survivorship and disability. Galveston officials held meetings that included debates with Social Security officials and put it to a vote: Galveston County employees passed it by a 3-to-1 margin in 1981 - just in time. The Galveston Plan was implemented just before the U.S. Congress passed a reform bill in 1983 that closed the door for local governments to opt out of Social Security. To be sure, our plan wasn't perfect, and we have made some adjustments. For instance, a few of our retired county workers are critical of the plan today because they say they are making less money than they would have on Social Security. This is because our plan allowed workers to make "hardship" withdrawals from the retirement plan during their working years. Some workers withdrew funds for current financial problems and consequently robbed their own future benefits. We closed that option in January 2005. Galveston vs. Social Security. Upon retirement after 30 years, and assuming a 5 percent rate of return - more conservative than Galveston workers have earned - all workers would do better for the same contribution as Social Security: Workers making $17,000 a year are expected to receive about 50 percent more per month on our alternative plan than on Social Security - $1,036 instead of $683. [see the Figure.] Workers making $26,000 a year will make almost double Social Security's return - $1,500 instead of $853. Workers making $51,000 a year will get $3,103 instead of $1,368. Workers making $75,000 or more will nearly triple Social Security - $4,540 instead of $1,645. Galveston County's survivorship benefits pay four times a worker's annual salary - a minimum of $75,000 to a maximum $215,000 - versus Social Security, which forces widows to wait until age 60 to qualify for benefits, or provides 75 percent of a worker's salary for school-age children. In Galveston, if the worker dies before retirement, the survivors receive not only the full survivorship but get generous accidental death benefits, too. Galveston County's disability benefit also pays more: 60 percent of an individual's salary, better than Social Security's. Two government studies of the Galveston Plan - by the Government Accountability Office and the Social Security Administration - claim that low-wage workers do better under Social Security. However, these studies assumed a low 4 percent return, which is the minimum rate of return on annuities guaranteed by the insurance companies. The actual returns have been substantially higher.

http://www.accountingtoday.com/news/CPAs-Congress-66821-1.html?ET=webcpa:e7126:61496a:&st=email A group of CPAs headed to Capitol Hill yesterday in what has become an annual ritual as they pressed lawmakers to deal with the many issues that accountants and their clients are forced to wrestle with on a daily basis, including taxes and regulations. The lobbying traditionally caps off the American Institute of CPAs’ Spring Meeting of Council in Washington, D.C. That may change next year, as the AICPA considers moving the location of the meeting to another location. But CPAs make extremely effective advocates for the Institute’s priorities, and they are well instructed on what messages to deliver to lawmakers.The lobbying traditionally caps off the American Institute of CPAs’ Spring Meeting of Council in Washington, D.C. That may change next year, as the AICPA considers moving the location of the meeting to another location. But CPAs make extremely effective advocates for the Institute’s priorities, and they are well instructed on what messages to deliver to lawmakers. Tax reform is the main priority of the Institute this time around. After what many tax practitioners would agree was a horrendous tax season this year, largely due to the New Year’s Day passage of fiscal cliff legislation to deal with the expired tax cuts, the need for tax reform is understandable. The AICPA provided CPAs with pages of talking points they could study before making the case to their lawmakers on Capitol Hill.

I think you missed Slippery's point. I think he's saying that if you prepare the estimate forms, you have given them the ability to do what is needed. That is your CYA, and puts the responsibility solidly on the client.

ATX posted this workaround for 12.16 crashes this afternoon Updated 5-17-2013 ATX2012 crashes (displays the long stack error then closes) when printing returns after the 12.16 update. Work-around: Run 'check return' right before printing the return. If any changes are made to the return (even tabbing through fields), you will need to run check return again before printing. SOLUTION: This will be fixed in version 12.17, planned for early June

Well, while I would never advise it as a tax professional's only scanner, if you have a lot of that sort of client, it might be money well spent to buy one for that purpose. Depending on the price, of course. After all, we often have duplicate tools that each perform well for a specific use, like multiple staplers, for example, a big one for those extra large files. Just depends if you have enough use of it to justify the cost in terms of time saved.

So true

I PROMISE, this is my final post on this subject, unless something huge and unbelievable comes to light. For those of you who do not know Kip Dellinger, he is one of the most respected authors on tax subjects currently writing Arthur J. (Kip) Dellinger, Jr., CPA Kip Dellinger, CPA, is a tax controversy expert with broad expertise in the areas of CPA tax practice, regulatory discipline, and malpractice matters. He is an expert on conduct matters and substantive technical issues. Kip has been engaged by Big Four CPA firms on several tax shelter malpractice cases. Mr. Dellinger is recognized for his work as past chair of AICPA’s Tax Division Tax Practice Responsibilities Committee (2008–2009). He has authored over 60 articles on tax practice technical and procedural topics for leading publications. This is a recent letter on the subject he posted to Tax Talk, that covers the subject brilliantly, with expertise beyond my capacity. Steve - they were prohibited from organizing as Sec. 527 organizations because the ones being discussed were (and this is clearly explained in all the media article - from Fox to the New York Times) established as 'issue advocacy' organizations to advocate adherence to the Constitution, opposition to Obamacare and other conservative or libertarian 'views' - a 527 needs a 'candidate or candidates for which the organization spends money in express advocacy activities (i.e. 'vote for' or 'vote against'). To the extent that these organization engaged in the later activities, the did form Sec. 527 organizations (also regulated by the Federal Election Commission). Many of these organizations were formed to support or ballot issues in statewide elections where there's an election but no 'candidate', so every ballot issue committee is effectively a ©(4) unless a labor union or business league ©(5)s and (6)s are involved. Those organization also must form 527 if they engage in express advocacy. The inquiries about the ©(4s were extensive, designed to intimate and to harass; for example, the inquiry indicated that the organization would have to disclose contributors even though that has never been required of c4s or c3s. This was clear over a year ago in a letter from Rep. Jim Jordan to the Asst Commissioner of TE/GE, which she follow-up upon by testifying that targeting wasn't taking place (when we now know was in fact taking place) All Obama did was rant about the Kochs and 'secret money' and the media parroted those comments (acknowledging that the rules for 501c4 organizations permitted what was happening). This was an Administration of a political party that ranted and raved about the whole issue of 501c4 conservative leaning groups. Did Obama or anyone in the White House directly order the behavior at IRS? Doubtful, but IRS employees - unionized and vested in ever growing government don't live in a vacuum - they read newspapers, watch TV, some of them even read Vanity Fair, if not The Nation) - or the watch Steven Colbert. And some of them, we are going to discover acted on the marching orders they perceived by watching and listening to the leaders of their chosen political party and their media champions - because they could. Protected by their powerful union and believing they could conceal their activity, or that IRS would never disclose what they were doing because of the circle the wagons mentality of an organization where there is only two political appointees - Commissioner and Chief Counsel (who doesn't count in a situation such as this). One would bet that Lois Lerner, Asst Commissioner at TE/GE never informed Commissioner of the matter and while it appears that Asst Commissioner, Steve Miller, knew of the problem, one can bet - as a career guy and former head of TE/GE - he circled the wagons and didn't inform Doug Schulman either. It's happened before, we did not find out about the IRS's Ideological Origins Project (again c4s primarily), initiated by President Kennedy's White House in 1961 until the post-Watergate Church Committee hearings in 1977. Also, Commissioner of IRS is truly a non-partisan appointment approved by the Senate and Jay Carney's attempt to push the problem to a Bush appointee was both juvenile and disgusting. For the record, I've written about the intersection of taxes and politics for nearly 20-years for Tax Notes, and my articles on the taxation of political money have appeared in the Journal of Tax Practice and Procedure, for the AICPA's TAX ADVISER magazine, the LA Daily Journal, and the San Francisco Recorder. I represented donors to the Committee to Re-Elect the President and McGovern for President in 1972 in gift tax disputes before IRS Appeals, served as tax adviser to the Daniel Ellsberg and Pentagon Papers Fund during the Watergate era and also was tax adviser to Another Mother for Peace. Later I served as Treasurer of Citizens for the Republic (the then 4th largest PAC in the U.S.) a nice gentleman named Ronald Reagan was our Chairman Emeritus. So I've seen IRS abuse and it the chilling impact it can have in the political arena from both side and more than just academically. Kip Dellinger, CPA Cooper Moss Resnick Klein & Co. LLP Van Nuys

From a Kim Komando column, a good review of the Neat products: QUESTION I am thinking about buying a NeatDesk scanner and would like your advice. Should I? - Charlene, ANSWER I love your question, Charlene. You go straight to the point. So, I'll be direct right back: No, you shouldn't buy a NeatDesk. Surprised? For those who don't know, the NeatDesk is a personal document scanner. Document scanners are generally advertised to people who want a paperless office. You can scan multiple document types - including receipts and business cards - to keep your home or office less cluttered. NeatDesk supports two-sided scanning and optical character recognition for converting images into text documents. It can handle multiple documents unattended and scans 20 or more pages per minute. Sounds great! So why am I not a fan of the NeatDesk? The least expensive NeatDesk costs $200. Models with even more features can cost up to $400. That's a substantial chunk of change. To be clear, I don't have any complaints about the NeatDesk's hardware. However, I'm not such a fan of the software. The NeatDesk comes with a proprietary program, Neat, to organize your documents. Unfortunately, Neat works well only with the NeatDesk scanner. If at some point in the future you switch scanners, you'll need a new program. That means all your organization efforts will be wasted. Of course, you could use Neat to save your scans as universal PDF files and organize them yourself to avoid that hassle. But, you can do that with any scanner. If you really need a super-powered document scanner, I would look into the Fujitsu ScanSnap models. They equal NeatDesk scanners in features and price, and most are packaged with a full version of Adobe Acrobat - a powerful PDF editor that sells for $199 on its own.

"We can also debate if the contribution rate should be increased to keep up with inflation." That should not be necessary because as WAGES increase due to inflation or increases in productivity, the amount of FICA paid in goes up too.

Even if they only have one NY employee, Not-for-profits that are compensating individuals for their services are required to obtain a workers' compensation insurance policy with the following exceptions: Paid clergy and members of religious orders are exempt from mandatory coverage (but can be covered voluntarily). To be exempt the clergy and members of religious orders must be performing only religious duties. Members of supervised amateur athletic activities operated on a nonprofit basis, provided that such members are not otherwise engaged or employed by any person, firm, or corporation participating in such athletic activity. Paid individuals engaged in a teaching capacity in or for a religious, charitable or educational institution (Section 501©(3) under the IRS tax code) are also exempt from mandatory coverage (but can also be covered voluntarily). To be exempt, the teachers must only be performing teaching duties. Paid individuals engaged in a non-manual capacity in or for a religious, charitable or educational institution (Section 501©(3) under the IRS tax code) are also exempt from mandatory coverage (but can also be covered voluntarily). [Manual labor includes but is not limited to such tasks as filing; carrying materials such as pamphlets, binders, or books; cleaning such as dusting or vacuuming; playing musical instruments; moving furniture; shoveling snow; mowing lawns; and construction of any sort.] Persons receiving charitable aid from a religious or charitable institution (Section 501©(3) under the IRS tax code) who perform work in return for such aid and who are not under any express contract of hire, and certain persons receiving rehabilitation services in a sheltered workshop.