kcjenkins

Nope, being 'inventory' or 'freight' is not "Use". And I know you know that. :rolleyes:

I found it humorous that when I Googled my LinkedIn profile, one of the things I found there under Experience was "ATX Supreme Guru". :lol:

As Benjamin Franklin noted, "How many observe Christ's birthday! How few, his precepts! O! 'tis easier to keep Holidays than Commandments." I wish you all a very merry Christmas, and a wonderful New Year and Tax Season as well.

Jainen is wrong and Gail is right, IMHO. It's original use was as rental property by the leasing company.

Tell her to back up her files right away!!!! On a FLASH DRIVE or other separate media. It's probably going to die on her real soon. I'd advise that she take it NOW to a good computer repairman, who can do a backup first then check out the system and decide if it needs a new hard drive, or there are other problems. And remember, new computers are quite cheap right now.

I expect the page will be updated soon for 2009.

That date is for the 'new' credit for people who have been homeowmers for at least 5 of the last 8 years. The tp who qualifies as a new homebuyer does get covered for the entire year, but not the ones just now covered.

Here's wishing you a wonderful :bday:

I noticed this Child related Tax Benefits Chart on the IRS website, & thought I would share it with you all. Handy to print for a client with questions. http://www.eitc.irs.gov/central/childbenefit/

Lucho, I's suggest you call the BOE help number, they are very nice about helping you get new businesses set up correctly.

Form 6847 is the form the client needs to sign.

This just in from Washington, DC: The Supreme Court has ruled there will be no Nativity scene this year in the nation's capital. The ruling was not based on any religious principle, however. The problem stems from the inability of Nativity organizers to locate three wise men anywhere in the city. The search for a virgin likewise was difficult. On the other hand, there has been no problem finding enough donkeys to fill the stables.

IRS Tries to Make Form 944 More Flexible BY MICHAEL COHN DECEMBER 15, 2009 The Internal Revenue Service is making changes next year in the Employer’s Annual Tax Return form. Form 944 was designed to reduce the burden on small employers by letting them file one employment tax return for the year instead of filing four quarterly Form 941 returns, as Wanda Valentine, a senior analyst with the IRS’s Office of Federal, State and Local Governments, wrote in the latest edition of the IRS FSLG Newsletter. However, these employers have to be really small in order to be eligible to file Form 944, with an estimated employment tax liability of $1,000 or less for the entire calendar year. The IRS recently released a revenue procedure to create greater flexibility for these employers beginning in 2010. But things will be changing rapidly. Beginning in tax year 2010, no employer will be required to file Form 944 and new procedures will be in place. “Beginning in 2010, eligible employers who qualify can elect to file Form 944 or continue to file Form 941,” wrote Valentine. “Eligible employers who wish to file Form 944 must make the request by calling the IRS on or before April 1 of the current tax year (April 1, 2010 for returns for tax year 2010).” It certainly takes some effort to keep up with the IRS and its guidance, but at least it’s all up there on the Web, as long as you know where to look.

http://www.webcpa.com/news/DocIt-Adds-Tax-Functions-Document-Software-52732-1.html?ET=webcpa:e622:61496a:&st=email

http://www.irs.gov/efile/article/0,,id=98145,00.html Should I backup withhold on a payee who is a nonresident alien? Yes. A nonresident alien is subject to backup withholding unless you have a signed Form W-8BEN, Certificate of Foreign Status of Beneficial Owner for United States Tax Withholding, or W-8, Certificate of Foreign Status, on file. Nonresident aliens are subject to backup withholding, and identified via Form W-8BEN. Read Pub 1231 for more detail, and to give you what you need to convince your client.

That's OK, Bob, some things are easy to overlook. Hope you do update your profile, at least to add your DOB and location, by the way.

If you are using XP, Remote Desktop Connection is all you really need, and you already have that. http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-vista/Remote-Desktop-Connection-frequently-asked-questions http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/downloads/tools/RDCLIENTDL.mspx

Here's the new option. Give the need to help clients protect against ID theft, it's something you need to read if you print and file any paper 1099s.

Another reason behind this, besides the payroll taxes, may be the Heath-Care Bill. This could help them if they go after small businesses to determine if a business is trying to get around the threshhold requiring mandatory employee insurance. Yes, that would be a back door methodology but, if they can push another 10% of the businesses to provide insurance, then that requires less enforcement against individuals not covered that can have negative repercussions politically. Especially if they finally legislate financial penalties against anyone who is not covered by a plan. And, no, Jainen,I do not hear any black helicopters. I just have a lot of distrust of our government, and that distrust is growing every day, as I listen to the news. Things like hearing the head of the EPA threatening the Congress that if they don't pass the laws she and the President want, she'll do it by fiat. When did our constitution get amended to make a Cabinet Secretary able to pass laws that Congress refuses to pass?

True, however, if you read the article itself, you will see that they had a number of respondents who self-identify as 'tax professionals' but who in fact do use those programs. While we may naturally wonder how many really are 'professionals', clearly they think of themselves that way. And no doubt some of them are simply semi-retired professionals, who trust their own knowledge enough, and have a small enough client base, that they decide the saving in cost offsets the other problems.

Here's a good article that you might want to review before you talk to clients about this one. http://tax.cchgroup.com/images/FOT/Wiggins_MAG_12-09.pdf

In February 2010, the Internal Revenue Service will begin its first Employment Tax National Research Project (NRP) in 25 years. The IRS will randomly select 2,000 taxpayers each year for the next 3 years. Taxpayers will receive notices describing the NRP process similar to those used in recent NRP studies for individuals and Form 1120S corporations. Examinations comprising the study will be conducted to collect data that will allow the IRS to understand the compliance characteristics of employment tax filers. When completed, this information will help the IRS select and audit future employment tax returns with the greatest compliance risk. The IRS will: Review employment tax filings, Review business records for improperly classified independent contractors, Review S corporation owner wages for reasonableness, and Review accountable plan compliance for travel and auto reimbursements. To conduct its audit, the IRS is probably going to request the QuickBooks file for the business, if they use QB. The IRS reportedly purchased 800 licenses from QuickBooks for training its auditors. If the client provides his or her QuickBooks file to the IRS auditor, he or she also may be giving the examiner access to more than 1 year's information. Will this lead to more multi-year audits? To limit the client's exposure and provide data only between certain dates, perhaps "Data Transfer Utility" will help. I'd be inclined, in most every case, to advise clients to give them printed files rather than computer backup files, but that's a judgement call for each case. Certainly, for those clients who use QB but only provide you with a printout of balance sheet and/or income statement, a head's up now would be wise, and perhaps some current 'consulting' work can be picked up now till tax season starts?

I think the accountant charged based on the time it took, and that is fair, in my humble opinion. He did not do the original return, but we all know getting H&R to help their clients is usually a waste of time. And that is who did the original return. Block only defends on 'errors' that they may have made, not on factual issues like dependency. And usually, if they do go to an audit, they do little, except explain that they took the information from the client, period. [At least, that is what I've been told, numerous times, by new clients who used them in the past.] That is not going to help much. How that bill was calculated we don't know. It may have included both the parents and the daughter's audits, we don't know. I don't understand why you see the fact that the parents have been audited before is significant, since they were, as I understood it, no-change audits. We all do know that the IRS prefers to pick on the smaller business owners, as easier targets than the big guys who have high-powered firms defending them. It's simple logic, they get more $$$$ from those who they bill for $3 or $4 K, who don't think they owe it, but know that it will cost them that much to fight it.

Thanks for the link. The really sad part is that those people who used TurboTax almost never "needed" tech support. Which we all know simply means that they in many cases did not even recognize their actual need. We've all seen some of those returns!

I just don't see what it matters what is on the SFR. You are not amending that, you are filing the original return.