Slappy Tax

To efile 1099s, each 1099 has to have a unique account number or identifying number (which is separate from the FEIN). Unless you have some reason to assign specific, more complex numbers, just number them sequentially, 1, 2, 3, 4.

Oops, you are correct about the EFTPS. I misread the original post. I thought the person had already made a Q4 Est Tax Pmt, and was wondering how to make a second catch-up Q4 payment. I now see that he was asking whether just to boost the pending Q4 pmt, and if so, how. My point about EFTPS is that when you make Est Tax Pmts via EFTPS, the system asks you for only 3 inputs: the amount, the year, and the settlement date, and you do not specify which "quarter" (or more accurately which estimated tax deadline) you're responding to. I still think EFTPS is a better way of fiddling with tax payments, but you're right that in this instance it would make no difference.

EFTPS would make this a snap.

The format for a DCN (for a TY2008 return) is 00-xxxxxx-yyyyy-9, where xxxxxx is your 6-digit EFIN, and yyyyy is an increasing, sequential number assigned by your software to the return. For instance, under certain conditions, your first efiled return could be assigned 00001. In actuality, the software can be set to begin assigning sequential numbers beginning with any number, for example, beginning with 01000. The only requirement is that the same DCN not be repeated on different returns or the return will reject. DCNs are not particularly useful numbers so "just set it and forget it." A few years ago the IRS conducted a poll to see whether eliminating DCNs altogether would cause any problems. I never learned the outcome of the poll, but DCNs are still around so someone must have expressed a use for them.

Staples is the worst company for advertising items to get you to the store to find that, magically, they're all sold out. It was probably predictable with the free Quickbooks, but I've found Staples to do this same thing repeatedly with several different items. In fact, I cannot recall a single instance of responding to a "too good to be true" ad from Staples to find the item in stock, and it really doesn't matter what time you get there. It's borderline bait-and-switch with them. Office Depot's special offers always have so much fine print and exclusions that they're basically meaningless, and I gave up shopping there about 3 years ago. I'm not surprised that Office Depot is closing down a bunch of stores. Office Max used to be the worst in terms of customer service, but that was years ago. Now Office Max is the best in my book. All 3 of these stores are within 3 miles of my office so I do have a choice, but Office Max is the one that works best for me lately.

If you use QuickBooks for online banking or have any clients who do, spend some time at the following links before you upgrade to QB2009: http://community.intuit.com/post/detail/db...vSr3yp1acfARklS http://community.intuit.com/post/detail/aD...t8r3BT3acfAQhOa If you do get the QB2009 version (for free or however), be very careful not to jump whole hog into QB2009 online banking without making absolutely sure that you can revert to your old version's online banking. This is common sense, but if you read the posts at the links above, you'll be amazed at how many people upgraded without leaving themselves any path to retreat. If you're unable to access the links (they may require an Intuit-related account--I'm not sure), then perform an online search for QuickBooks 2009 online banking, or check the reviews at any major online seller, such as Amazon.com. The horror stories are not hard to find. Insofar as I know, the complaints are only about the online banking features. I'm not aware of complaints about other aspects of the program. If you acquire the program assuming that the online banking problems will be soon resolved, take note that Intuit's responses so far have been far from reassuring.

I didn't miss anything. My responses were targeted at correcting the original point in which some responses gave the impression that the only filing option for an SMLLC is via Schedule C, which is not the case, and I pointed that out. That evolved into questions on depreciation, but my responses remained valid.

I would agree with Karen Lee to transfer the assets at book value if a transfer had taken place. For example, if the SMLLC had elected S-Corporation status and the assets had been transferred to the corporation. However, because the client has formed an SMLLC and has opted to have it treated as a disregarded entity, no changes have occurred with the depreciable assets, i.e., they have not been sold, scrapped, donated, or replaced, and no change of ownership has occurred. I would add the name of the LLC and the EIN to the Schedule C, and would chug right along. But I still await the wisdom of others.

Ajuroff: Maybe I am really missing something here, but I don't think you need to do anything with the depreciation other than what you have been doing. In other words, the client has formed a Single Member LLC (SMLLC) and has elected to have it treated as a disregarded entity for tax purposes. So in effect, for federal tax purposes, nothing has changed. He will continue to file the Schedule C but with the business name entered on Line C of Schedule C, and the LLC EIN entered on Line D of Schedule C. My take on this is that the LLC he formed is a legal entity under the laws of his state, but he has not done anything (other than create a name for his proprietorship and obtain an EIN for the LLC) for federal tax purposes. This means that the assets he has been depreciating as a sole proprietor have undergone no change for federal tax purposes, and the client will just continue to file his Schedule C as though nothing has happened (other than adding the LLC name and EIN to the Schedule C). It may be that I'm oversimplifying, but it could also be that you're overcomplicating. Let's see what others say.

For Joel & Ray: Why can't the SMLLC elect to be treated as an S-Corp for tax purposes? I don't believe it's true that the only filing option for an SMLLC is via Schedule C. Let me know if I'm missing something.

I have the Accountant's Edition of Quickbooks 2008, and am more or less familiar with these topics. First and foremost, before you or any of your clients purchase Quickbooks 2009, be sure to go to this link and acquaint yourself with the horror stories there. It's not a pretty picture so don't upgrade yet or allow any of your clients to upgrade. It seems as though the problems are restricted to the online banking features, but there is no way I would upgrade to QB2009 at this time. Here's the link: http://community.intuit.com/post/detail/db...vSr3yp1acfARklS I agree with the other posts on here. You can read data from older versions of QB via a client's backup file or portable company file. But as others have mentioned, once you import that data file into a new version of QB, you cannot turn it back into data that the client can restore unless he/she has the same "year" version of QB. Quickbooks definitely has a learning curve. To state the obvious, don't go by what's on the box or what you see in flyers and ads. These are all sales fluff from Intuit, and Intuit is far from being accurate or honest in its sales pitches. Just review the link above if you need evidence of that. The accountant's copy does have a procedure for allowing the client to send you a data file and to keep working in his copy while you tinker with his data before exporting it back to him. However, these procedures require alot of savvy on both ends, yours and the client's. It's not for the faint of heart, and I have never found it to be worthwhile. The idea that someone proposed of remote accessing QB on the client's computer is what I would consider a better procedure. If you're not familiar with QB, I would have the client send me a portable company file which I could experiment with. Once I was sure of the changes that need to be made, I would then set up with the client for me to access his QB remotely from my computer. The Accountant's version actually has a close-to-foolproof way of doing this. I've used it, and it works fairly well. Remember, though, the weak link is typically the computer expertise of the client. Both of you will have to have patience to get this to work.

This is so new that I think it'll be awhile before whatever is going to happen even begins to happen. I've gone through my databases since TY2005 and found a smattering of clients (seven, I think) that will be affected by this. Luckily, I found only one from TY2005 so I'm thinking of using that one as my test case. I contacted that client (who was a one-time client who had me straighten out her botched self-prepared return). I explained everything pertaining to the demutualization issue and the Fisher ruling. As you can imagine, it's a lengthy explanation with a whole lot of "nobody knows yet." I'm trying to keep from having to repeat that long phonecall with the remaining six clients. Anyway, to come to the point, I explained that I would amend her return for $70, but that I could not offer any guarantee that the IRS would pay the refund ($400 in her case). Of course, her enthusiasm for the whole process quite understandably flagged somewhat at that proposal. I made it clear that she could amend her own return for free, and I even pointed her towards the demutualization.org website for her to do her own research. My main point to her is that if she plans to do anything, she must do it by 04/15/2009 when the sun will set on her window for amending her TY2005 return. I'm now thinking of calling her back and offering to amend her return at no charge to use as a test case so that I'll have something to tell the remaining clients. (The deadlines for amending the remaining returns are at least 20 months off.) Or I might just sit tight for the time being to see if anything transpires on this issue before jumping into it since we do have the luxury of time at this point. My only conditions for amending this client's return for free would be (1) she pledges to let me know the outcome once the IRS responds to her 1040-X, and (2) she agrees that I incur no further obligation to see things through to the end if this thing takes on a life of its own. If anyone has better ideas, please post. Otherwise, I'll just follow my general rule of thumb: When in doubt, procrastinate. As an aside, six of the seven clients would realize amended refunds of $400-$500. The seventh would realize an amended refund of $1,434, assuming of course that the IRS acquiesces to the Fisher decision, which is not at all clear at this stage. So while these are nice tidy little sums, they're not exactly life-changing bonanzas.

This might be what you're looking for: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-prior/p544--2002.pdf

Source: General Instructions for 1099 Series, Etc. 31 January 2008 = Must be postmarked or delivered to the recipient (GEN-10 & Chart on Page GEN-16) 28 February 2008 = Must be postmarked to the IRS (GEN-3 & Chart on Page GEN-16) * 31 March 2008 = Deadline for efiling with the IRS (GEN-3 & Chart on Page GEN-16) * The IRS may have meant 29 February 2008 since this is a leap year, but the instructions do specify 28 February 2008. Use Form 8809 if you require an extension. See Page GEN-4.

Earth to Tom. Earth calling Tom. How do you read? Over