joanmcq

The bulk of our January through March audits at TR are due to options, so I get a lot of experience. The early ones are the options not being reported at all or with the wrong sell price. Later on in the year (around september) we start getting the withholding mismatches...where the tps add the w/h on the exercise of option sheets to the w/h on the w-2. So anyone working notices at TR gets to know options very well!

My doggie wags with her whole body, so I have to in response. It does do wonders! I was gone overnight at the ethics seminar, and the dog and my old kitty are so happy I'm home...and so so am I.

What questions do you have? I've got the quickfinders right here and pretty much know options backwards and forwards anyways. Or give me a call: 802-0225 Boy I took a quick look at the fairmark link. Good Stuff!!

Did they use Quickbooks?

Thank you for this. It is very easy for me to get licensed under substantial equivelency, but I guess the firm doesn't want to spend the $100 to do so. Their lackadaisical attitude is very annoying and frustrating. You would think they would jump at the chance to get someone easily licensed to rep in Oregon (EAs need to pass the OR part of the LTC exam, and there are only two CPAs working here, moi included), but this does not appear to be the case. My direct supervisor supports me in this however. And luckily, I am taking the CalCPA ethics course tomorrow in Modesto, so I will pose the question directly, and hopefully come back with something whereby I can either get them to support me in this, or I can decline the case or just file it myself.

I did not prepare the return. The firm I work for mostly represents DIYers. If I did prepare it, (an out-of-state preparer can prepare returns if they do not advertise in oregon, work in oregon, or hold themselves out as being licensed in oregon) there would be no problem with the OR representation, since that is one of the exceptions to the requirement to be licensed. There would not be a problem if this was a federal issue either, since I can represent an Oregon resident on a federal issue. Its an OR POA, for an OR audit.

Yes. But only OR, CA & now MD have ANY requirements for licensing for tax prep. and even OR states as long as you do not advertise or solicit OR returns, and do not prepare them IN OR, a CPA is allowed to do so. So, for example, if one of my clients moves to OR, and I continue to prepare his returns, I'm ok. If I solicit an OR resident or hold myself out as being an OR preparer, I am not ok. Representation standards are different. To represent on a return you did not prepare, you have to be licensed.

The firm I work for (not a CPA firm) has assigned me to work on an OR correspondence audit. I am licensed in CA, and would be working from CA. I researched the requirements to be on Power of Attorney in OR, and I am not licensed in OR, but could file for substantial equivalency. My firm wants me to just send in the POA w/out the OR licnense number just to see if they send it back or if it goes through. Others in the firm have done so, but are EAs, not CPAs. I am having ethical doubts about the legitimacy of this, and don't think I can 1) hold myself out as a CPA w/o an oregon license (although its not clear if that is the case if I am not physically present in OR) & 2) if I don't put CPA on the POA, that knowing I am not licensed in OR is enough to prevent me from ethically submitting a request to be a representative knowing that I don't qualify. Any thoughts from either the OR or CA sides, or just in general?

That's close to the CAMICO letter, but not exact. The CAMICO one doesn't have the bit about the Sch C and SE or the last disclaimer paragraghs. This is the important bit "We prepared the income tax returns noted above based on the documentation and other information provided to us by our client. We did not audit, review, or otherwise verify the accuracy of such documentation or information at any time, and we have not and do not express an opinion or give any other form of assurances regarding the same." But I just don't sign one. If they want a stated income loan they can buy a letter from a 'CPA' willing to sign one.

Well, if he is having so much fun, I can imagine him not thinking much about work. I don't when I'm on vacation!

And my 499th post was a real opinion. and this one is a thank you to my online community for lending support throughout the year. And I too wonder how JB is doing????

I won't even write these for my own clients. As a CPA, rendering an opinion on ANYTHING is heavily regulated. From what I understand, EAs are not permitted to render opinions, ie stating someone is self-employed. And NO client is worth getting sued, stressing over getting sued, or losing my license.

I know...if you are getting the full $600, its not that big of a sum that it makes a huge difference in your life. If you are really poor, then its free money, so kwitcherbitchin. 498!

number 497....

My own clients arent' calling....during my tax season meetings I pretty much told 'em you'll get what you get. But I get an email yesterday at my job from a guy asking why he didn't get the full $1200. I only have his 2006 return for which I'm doing a CP2000, not the 2007. I HAVE NO IDEA WHY YOUR REBATE WAS LESS THAN 1200!!!!!! thank you for letting me whine. And my coworkers get upset when I scream at work.

I renewed to day too. just clicked the email & away she went. didn't even have to sign into the website which was nice. 496!

So now she will wait another few months until they refund her the $151. she'll have a few bucks in interest added to make up for the int & pen she paid earlier. *sob!* (Not!)

Oh, and I've only got a few to go too.

Ok, now what happens to KC when she passes 1000?

Stockton is definitely the dividing line, until you get up to UCD. Then its not too bad on either side. I've been watching the gentrification of the area for a lot of years now. Was a while ago, Y st. was the dividing line between ok & yuck in that area; I had a friend on Y and you wouldn't want to walk down 1st. Now not nearly so bad for a few blocks south. And, as I said, 14th wasn't too great 15 years ago. Now on my side of Stockton you are ok until you go past fruitridge. Are you in the front of Tallac, or the back or on one of the walking paths inside?

Stockton & Fruitridge? That's a JH now, but what a place to cut your teeth! Especially about the time you were there. Funny about Sac; the other side of Stockton at Fruitridge is fine now, but that side is still pretty icky. especially the little strip mall where the JH is. 15 years ago 14th Ave was bad..I lived there then and there were drug dealers all over. Now it's nice pretty much all the way to Fruitridge. I'm at 21st ave & 64th. Let me know when you're open house is...I'd love to meet you!

Julie, being as CA is community property, isn't the joint Sch C (w/2SEs) still available to us? That's why that check box has been in every program for as long as I can remember, although the noncommunity property people often didn't know that. Under community property laws any split for a jointly owned biz is going to be 50/50 by default.

Nice coffee shop in there. I had a friend that had set up shop in Tallac Village but she ended up getting a job with the county..needed a steady income. I got some of her clients when she quit. The Village Drive-in across the street has the best milk shakes! I'm about a half mile away.

Thank you KC! after today I need a pat on the back! Every situation I've come across today has been out, out, out, out-of-the-box.. At least its not 102 degrees today so I can go home and relax...no, got a CSTC meeting, so I get to hob-nob with tax geeks for a few hours. I really need a vacation!

I'm gonna bet this is somehow releated to the new H/W joint venture rules getting warped in transmission (remember the game of 'telephone'?) The instructions to the Sch E mention that you don't use Sch E to report an H/W 'rental real estate business' that is a qualified joint venture. This could easily be extrapolated to the OP.