kcjenkins

If they had a valid marriage in 2008, which they must have had to be able to register it here later, then they should have no problem with filing MFJ in 08.

You're welcome. Glad to hear you used it. Even better, that they responded fast. We can make the program better by giving them our feedback.

What message is that?

If they have SSNs, you were to 'skip' that question, JB.

Or to put it another way, you can get the credit, even without a SSN, if you are in the military.

Let us know when you get a reply. ;~)

Well, that helps me understand. That part of AR does still have it's various collections of old-style 'HIPPIES", the real thing, as well as a few outposts of Aryan Nation type sickos hiding out in the hills. The hippies are harmless but strange, and the others thankfully tend to hide from pretty much everybody. Of course, don't forget that the oh so enlightened states like CA and Washington have more of each of those than AR has people in total !!! Most of us are very normal, very nice, and not at all weird. Even Mt View is not that weird. Here's a link that might give another point of view. http://www.ozarkgetaways.com/things_to_do.html

But if you post to the Suggestion Box, you will get a response, normally within a day or less.

Did you post a request in the Suggestion Box on the MyATX home page? That is the fastest way to get an answer.

For Farmers, there is a special rule, they have until the First of March, or the first business day after that, if March 1st is on a weekend, so this year it is March 2. But, of course, if they don't owe, or are willing to pay penalty, they can wait until April 15, just like anyone else. But if they file and pay by the March deadline, they do not have any penalty. This rule recognizes that farming is one business where there is no good way to estimate what income will be, from year to year, so also no way to estimate tax liability. Too Dependant on both weather and market fluctuations.

Yep, I think it's just the 'terminology' that is confusing the issue here. It's not that the form is 'illegal', it is just that even if she signed it originally for 'all future years' she is not actually BOUND by that, she can 'revoke' it at any time. so what was at fault, IMHO, was what the form implies. Especially since if you read the instructions on page 2, that 'Tip" actually warns "To help ensure future support, you may not want to release your claim to the exemption for the child for future years." But it still says Custodial parent. You may agree to release your claim to the exemption for the child for the current tax year or for future years, or both. • Complete Part I if you agree to release your claim to the exemption for the child for the current tax year. • Complete Part II if you agree to release your claim to the exemption for the child for any or all future years. If you do, write the specific future year(s) or “all future years” in the space provided in Part II.

Well, I'm glad that helped, and I HOPE that a lot of other folks will read your post and be inspired to use the Suggestion Box, instead of just getting on here and griping about problems. Not that it is not OK to gripe, just that it does not let the people who can fix it know that it needs fixing. After all, the tax code is incredibly complex, and so are many of the forms, both federal and state, and there will always be some glitches. And especially with the state forms, those glitches may not show up until a complex series of combined factors come into play. So when ever someone spots one, or thinks they have spotted one, they need to let the programmers know. The SUGGESTION BOX is how you do that. And I've always found the response to be fast, polite, and helpful.

No one has any info beyond what is available to all at the MyATX site. There you can look for the expected release date for any form. Go to MyATX home page, look on the left side, click on 'find a form', and then look for your form. What is that form anyway? I could not find it listed on the CT tax site?

Have you considered calling the e-file Help Desk? If you call soon enough, you MIGHT get lucky and get someone helpful, who will let you fax her a copy of the W-2 or whatever, and make the change herself to the thing, before the return is processed. I know, it does not often happen, but I have heard of it happening. Worth a try.

We're not talking about combining the LETTERS, we are talking about editing the COVER SHEET that fronts the client copies, so that we can use just one cover sheet, which says "Federal & State Tax Returns" rather than use the standard, which is a separate cover sheet for the federal copies and for the state copies.

Maximum Automobile Value for Using the Cents-Per-Mile Valuation Rule For 2008, an employer providing a passenger automobile for the first time for the personal use by an employee may determine the value of the personal use by using the vehicle cents-per-mile value rule if the vehicle's fair market value on the date it is first made available to the employee does not exceed $15,000 for a passenger automobile other than a truck or van, or $15,900 for a truck or van. For more information, see Cents-Per-Mile Rule on page 20 of Publication 15-B, Employer's Tax Guide to Fringe Benefits. --05-MAR-2008 updated 09-JAN-2009

Only God knows all the answers. And I bet He does not even try to keep up with our tax code and regs and rulings and court decisions.........LOL.

"even if you are from AR" ??????????? Explain yourself, please.

Jack, I think you misread the original post. This was income from sales commissions, not reimbursements. The client is not an employee, he's a outside salesman, and his expenses were NOT reimbursed. The question was just about getting the 1099 on his C, since it was not in Box 7. Thankfully, that is no longer a problem as the program now lets us send it wherever we want to send it.

Why not use the 'suggestion box' option on the MyATX home page, to send the question to the people who actually know? I've found this to be the fastest way to get an answer to this sort of question. It goes directly to the programmers, who are the ones most likely to know the answer.

Come on, folks, for every tax software, this two weeks is always the worst for getting through, simply because so many are calling as they set up their software. No company can staff to cover that rush, any more than we can staff to cover our heaviest days, for those we just have to let them drop off or schedule a later appointment. I do think that anyone who is on hold for more than two hours should assume there is a problem with the 'hold', and retry. I've never known it to take over two hours, ever, even the worst time. That's my 2¢ worth.

Well, as I see it, the real dishonesty is that the EIC was started to offset the payroll tax poor families pay, and it certainly does that. But the pols, whenever they want to justify any tax break aimed at the non-taxpaying voters, still claim "well, they do pay taxes, they pay payroll taxes". Well, no, if they get EIC, they are NOT REALLY paying many payroll taxes, are they? A couple making $24K a year with two kids would pay $1836 in payroll tax, but get $3319 in EIC. That means they are getting all their payroll tax back, PLUS $1483 in welfare. A single person, however, would not get any EIC at that level. However, a single person earning $24K should not be considered poor. And a single person earning $10K would pay only $765 in payroll tax, and the EIC would repay $196 of that. And one making only $8K would pay $612 in payroll tax, and get EIC of $349. And if he made only $5K, he'd pay $383 in payroll tax, and get EIC of $384. Now, all of us have our own definition of 'poor', and it clearly differs depending on where you live. But it clearly does mean that the EIC makes the discussion of what is 'fair' hard to apply across the board, IMHO.

1993 is the last year that you can use on the 2008 return. 92 on the 2007 return.

I think most of us have saved the links to not only Tax Almanac, a very good link, but also to the IRS, the GPO. the SSA, and of course, the valuable state link, http://www.taxadmin.org/fta/link/FORMS.html I think anyone trying to come up with a new 'everything tax' link would be duplicating Tax Almanac, basically.

Yes, I've always modified my cover sheet to include both, as I don't want to waste a page just for a second cover sheet for the state return.