kcjenkins

Anything to make you all happy but I do think this is over-reaction, folks. Think about it........... We already have special forums for hardware issues, efile, etc, but few actually use them. Almost everyone just posts to General chat. Also, to Lion's point, the program-specific posts will soon taper off, and we will be back to a majority of normal tax questions. Happens every year at the start.

PLEASE, SCL, DO NOT USE A "VULGAR RESPONSE" ON THIS BOARD.

When you click on the Smiley icon, the smileys show up at the BOTTOM of the reply box. Maybe you just overlooked them?

No, Rita, the reason for the XXXXs was IRS EMPLOYEES that were putting their own bank acct info in the blank spaces .

Yes, remember that in another week or two, the software issues will taper off, and this board will be mostly tax questions. You are all welcome here, no matter what software you use.

Yep, that can be worth more in emotional rewards than you would ever get paid for the return.

Ye, TG, it just goes on the Sch C, as long as it is a single member PLLC. If she got an EIN for it, use that on the Sch C, if not, just use her SSN.

Look at the post on "forms will not open" that I just pinned. Might help.

I think this is very valuable, so am pinning this for now.

You only need them for PAPER RETURNS, but for those most states do want copies of the federal forms.

Since this is NOT a group for non-professionals, I agree with all the responses. And I am going to close this thread now. Enough said.

"I guess they were a little too quick to get rid of most of the talent at ATX." So very true.

The 72 hour policy makes no sense if you renew in say May, and the program does not ship until Dec. Would have to be 72 hours after delivery of a functioning product.

Dark Chocolate Moose Munch has gotten me through many a late [really late] night session.

I have won an audit that included the expense of a couple of race horses. Frankly, I'm still surprised I won that part! But my client had talked to me before he ever invested, so he kept detailed records from day one. And he hired a professional trainer, who participated in picking the horses he bought, and in racing them. And it certainly helped that although he had a net loss, he did have significant winnings. The thing that impressed the auditor the most was that in two years of racing, my client had only attended one race. If your client has great records, you might go with it, but if not, tell him what to do this year, and warn him of the significant risk of audit.

Cliff, I think you must have missed the blog note that explained that the reason they had to close down was tornado warning in GA where the tech people work.

It's there, but it's a separate form this year instead of in the client letter.

Look at the very bottom to find the box for moving a paragraph up or down.

Yes, I know I should avoid the political ones, but THIS one was just so ironically funny I could not resist, My apology to anyone who does not find it so.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBHT1RiG5Zg&feature=youtu.be

Now that is a great husband!!!!!

Probably half of them were so focused on their taxes that they did not notice. The others respect you so much they would not dream of pointing it out.

In the IRS’s legal brief in support of its motion, the agency admitted it had already received “over $100 million” in user fees from tax preparers, while only spending about $50 million to implement the regulations. But the IRS objected to spending the much smaller sum of $238,000 simply to notify tax preparers of the judge’s ruling in this case. “One of the main things where the IRS claims there’s a harm is that there are all these tax return preparers who have paid various fees to the IRS in order to take the exam and get this licensing, and they’re going to be bringing lawsuits, possibly class-action lawsuits, for refunds of those fees,” said Alban. “Well, if the judge suspends the injunction, that means all that many more tax preparers will have to pay all those many more fees, and the government’s liability will only increase under that regime. Essentially the government is saying, ‘Look, we’ve created this class of victims who are paying these fees, and now we want to continue to expand this group of victims and make them pay even more fees.’ The argument just doesn’t hold weight. “The safest thing to do at this point and the thing that makes the most sense is just to freeze things as they are right now, let the appeal proceed, and if the appeals court reverses the district judge, then the IRS can proceed implementing its regulations just as it was doing before and won’t have to worry about an extra year or more of refund claims for these fees,” he added. In its brief, the IRS argued that thousands of tax preparers would undoubtedly continue studying for and attempting to take the RTRP competency exams, and the IRS would have to undertake an extensive and costly outreach program to attempt to notify those who had already registered and received a preparer identification number. That aspect alone of shutting down the program would cost at least $238,000, the IRS estimated, not including the costs associated with modifying or breaching vendor contracts, shutting down computer systems, and finding other positions for the 167 IRS employees currently working on the return preparer project. Judge Boasberg will initially hear the IRS’s motion, but Alban doubts the judge will change his mind. “Their motion for a stay will initially at least be heard by the same judge who ruled against them last week,” Alban told Accounting Today last Friday. “They’re asking that judge to essentially suspend his judgment on the issue of the injunction and suspend the injunction so that the regulations would continue to be in effect while the IRS appeals the case.”

Good one