kcjenkins

LOVE IT

Schedule D, no exclusion.

Tom, where are you flying from, and did you find a good deal on the flight?

I agree, option 3, or a combination of 2 and 3.

It is human nature to resist change. Especially as you get older, and have seen a lot of "new, better" products turn out to be not better, at least now until the second or third or fourth try.

LOVE IT !!!

Is this why he can pitch with either arm, he's part frog? lol

That's good to know, that the reps still can make 'special deals' on the 'optional' features, at least.

Yes, using Report will alert any Moderator, and whichever one sees it first can fix the problem. So feel free to use that function if you think there is a problem.

Michael, I think you missed my point. Since the state MANDATES that there be an operating agreement, you should have no problem arguing that IF the operating agreement spells out who is responsible for the filing, that is who they must go after. My point is that you should take that position when talking to the agent. Look, we all know that state employees do sometimes exceed their authority, and there is nothing you can do about that. BUT, if you make a good legal argument before they act, you at least have a CHANCE of stopping that action before it happens. They don't like to look bad in court, and their bosses don't like it either. Given all the publicized cases of the misuse of Civil Forfeiture laws, there is no question that the state or IRS can get the money from the limited members. I'm just trying to give you what little argument there is on your client's side.

cute

The Managing partner would be liable for a breach of his fiduciary responsibilities, regardless of his being a limited partner. Have you gotten a copy of the Op Agreement?

Not my area of expertise, but maybe this might help. http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-Profits/Exempt-Organizations-Audit-Process

NY and NYC are especially notorious for fighting high-income taxpayers moving away. One example, after Rush Limbaugh moved to FL, NY audited him every year for 12 yrs, requiring him to prove that he was spending more time in FL than he spent in NY. That was in addition to changing his voter registration, car registration, doctors, etc. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/09/rush-limbaugh-new-york-ha_n_184926.html http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2011/02/11/judge_out_of_state_ny_property_owners_must_pay_ny_income_tax

Michael, that additional info does help me give a better answer. Can I assume it's a NY LLC? Unlike most states, New York's LLC law requires LLC members to adopt a written operating agreement. The Operating Agreement may be entered into before, at the time of, or within 90 days after filing the Articles of Organization. The Operating Agreement is the primary document that establishes the rights, powers, duties, liabilities, and obligations of the members among themselves and to the LLC. The Operating Agreement is purely an internal document and is not filed with the Department of State. So you need to get a copy of the Operating Agreement, to determine whether the liability for filing is spelled out. Sorry if my second answer sounded harsh, but I have seen too many small family LLCs where all members loved the benefits, but no one wanted to take care of the obligations. And your second post sounded a bit like that. ​New York law is silent on the consequences of not adopting an Operating Agreement. But if it has 100 members, it's probably got one, and while it's not clear how much the state will follow that Agreement, the fact that they mandate having one should work in favor of it being binding on the members. So if it states that the Managing member is responsible, the State agent should have to honor that.

Strange, to report only for EAs, when it's reporting on PTINs?

No need for a 3115 as this is not a 'change' it's just adding a new depreciable asset.

LLC is not the same as a corp, more like a partnership, although state laws do vary a bit and the Operating Agreement may also speak to the responsibilities, but in general, all members have some basic responsibilities. So they wanted the tax benefits of the write-offs, but not to pay for the legal obligations? Cry me a river!

Probably any of them, depending on what the state law says. Although in such case, the other partners would have grounds to sue the 'tax partner' for his/her failure to take care of the obvious responsibility to file required returns, to get it back.

HERE IS A SIGN I THINK MOST OF US WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IN OUR OFFICE

Since they are cash basis, and paid it in 2014, place the repairs in service in 14.