kcjenkins

It all depends on the bank. If he is a signer on the account, the bank will probably allow it. If not, some banks will, others will not. The IRS itself does not seem to care, but some banks will allow you to open an account with no checks, just to get a refund, so you might call around and find out if any in your town do that. If so, he could get one of those accounts to get the refund in. Or, of course, just get a paper check, which only adds one week to the time. If you are not sure the bank will allow it, that's the better way, because if the IRS sends it to the bank and the bank rejects it, it will add three to four weeks to the time he gets the paper check.

And you should always keep in mind, and remind the client, that sometimes it's much cheaper in the long run to file MFS and pay a bit more tax, but avoid being tied to the other partner's obligations, having to share information, etc. Often it's better to just pay a little more to Uncle and avoid having to deal with the ex over the tax issues. And they even have the option, for 3 years, to amend and file jointly, if things reach a peaceful level after all the issues of the divorce are dealt with.

Yes, they only update the info there once a week. Used to do it on Sunday, probably still do. And as for that Tues date, I've noticed that they always do that on the earliest posting, giving themselves an extra 5 days, then the second week it shows the actual Friday date. I think they just don't want to have to back track if they miss a Friday deadline. You know what I mean. They do send them on Friday, but some banks don't give credit until Monday, so if they tell you Tues you won't be calling them on Friday morning because it is not in the bank yet! And when you see it there Monday you are happy because you were not expecting it until Tuesday.

My status date field shows both the date AND the time. Did you narrow the column so that it cut off the time?

Send the suggestion to the Suggestion Box link on MyATX, and odds are good that it might be added. Those posts go directly to the programmers. Like the old 'Forms Pipeline'. I've had great results from them. The M has been opening automatically for me, when it applies.

J.R., I agree with you that he could report it in 2009, as long as it is clearly explained. My reasoning is that while he may have 'earned' it from work done in the prior years, his RIGHT to receive it was not determined until 2009. So he not only Received it in 2009, his right to receive it was not known until 2009.

Don, I hope you put that info in the Suggestion Box at MyATX, so the programmers can correct it. Although it is a stupid rule change, since if you put Preparer there they merely have to look down a line to see the same info.

I had not noticed it because have not had one yet that needed it. But thanks for the heads-up. Sounds like it might be an improvement.

I don't really understand the question as stated. When the property was sold, did they liquidate the LLC? If so, then yes, the loss would qualify to be taken. But I don't get that last sentence at all? All the members would report their share of the loss.

Of course, the real lesson here is how crazy complex the code has gotten, that you need such a complex chart to calculate who is a dependent. A question that the layman assumes is simple. And why those using TT so often screw up.

Remember, filing joint returns is one of the 'indicators' of "holding yourself out as married" which is part of establishing a commom-law marriage. They definitely do need a divorce, or else the only option is MFS unless the client has a child living with him, to qualify for HOH.

Yes, it's a sale and should be shown on a 4797.

You're welcome. USDE might have a list on their website, I have not checked. But usually just a call to the school can get the info.

By all means, do one year at a time, and get paid for that one before you spend your time, your most valuable resource this time of year, on any more. Sometimes those people who put off filing for 3 or more years put off paying for the work they get just as long, or longer.

Yes, online courses may count, IF the provider of the courses is a qualified school. Qualified education expenses are tuition and certain related expenses paid to an eligible educational institution. An eligible educational institution is any college, university, vocational school, or other postsecondary educational institution eligible to participate in a student aid program administered by the U.S. Department of Education. Usually you get that info from the school itself.

:lol: :)

IRC 152(c )(4) (C ) No parent claiming qualifying child If the parents of an individual may claim such individual as a qualifying child but no parent so claims the individual, such individual may be claimed as the qualifying child of another taxpayer but only if the adjusted gross income of such taxpayer is higher than the highest adjusted gross income of any parent of the individual.

No, when individual owners sell their stock, the company does not report anything, because as far as the company is concerned, it's nothing to them. The seller will report his sale on his personal Sch D, the buyer will not have anything to report until and unless he sells the stock he bought. The corp merely records the new owner so that any dividends go the the owner of record. That is why when you buy stock, you send in the old certificate and the company issues you a new one in your name.

Now who is ASSUMING, Jainen? This house was so bad that they did not sell it or rent it, so just left it sitting empty, but you are going to assume that it was worth $125K???? Oh yeah, you are also ASSUMING that there was insurance?

Well, the easiest way to do that, IME, is to print out the Last Year Comparison pages, and then take a highlighter, and highlight the Total Income, Total withholding, and Refund lines. If they made about the same thing, but had $1000 less withheld, and their refund is $900 less than last year, that is pretty easy to see.

I would not ASSUME that this is the whole story. For one thing, if it were the whole story, he'd have almost certainly done something about it before this. He may have owed the employer some money that the owner offset against that last check. Which in some states is not legal, but in some it may be. And even if it were not legal to do the offset, the SOL started running when he did that, and is probably run out now. Since you have not put your state in your profile [and I wish you all would at least put the state in there, please] I don't know what state we're talking about, but amending the return would NOT be the way to go. At best he might have a claim in small claims court against the guy, but if he wanted to explain the situation to a Judge I bet he'd have done that years ago. Almost certainly, there is more to the story than you know, so giving him any more advice than to talk to an attorney would be a mistake, IMHO. It's clearly not a tax issue, because proving, at this late date, that the W-2 was in error is almost impossible. Especially given that the SOL on amending it is about to run out, too.

I agree, Margaret, they still own the land, so they really do not have a loss until they sell that. The cost of the cleanup would be added to their basis just as the cost of demolishing the old house would have.

Gee, you think just like an IRS employee, Jainen. Opps, don't mean to be insulting. But yeah, you do make the point that the law is so darn complex that we can not answer anything without making a lot of assumptions.

You are supposed to sign the 8879, either by hand or by printing the name in the box. The printed name is considered the same as your signature, but leaving it blank is not one of the options.

What part of "Mark supported his mother 100% in 2009. She was in a nursing home in FL the whole year and Mark paid everything for the nursing home... everything." is not clear?