Catherine

Any ATX Forum member who wants Gala apples from my tree, let me know. I'm bringing some for @Lion EA but could certainly bring more!

The only thing I know about ERC is all the calls and emails I've gotten telling me I'm eligible or offering to "help" my clients. I know all my clients; anyone eligible got sent in ages ago.

OK, guys - it's this Wednesday, for anyone who wants to join in at the last minute. I'm spending tomorrow making sure I'm ready for the drive.

"Uhhh, that would be a great big negatory, good buddy." (Don't even recall where that silly quote comes from!)

Did you ever hear of "The Nigerian Spam Scam Scam" by Dean Cameron? My husband & I saw a performance of it (based on a true series of interchanges) in Scotland in 2004. My husband nearly fell out of his seat, from laughing so hard. It was wonderful. Here's a link to a YT teaser/promo video of it. Dean Cameron's Nigerian Spam Scam Scam I thought at one point DC had written it all out, but now I can't find it.

Hi folks, For the first time in I don't know how long I have an estate electing to be treated as part of a trust under section 645. Form 8855 transmits with the return, but my software (Drake) says it must also be paper-filed (like the 3115, I guess). The filled out form only has entries in Part I, and has a place under that for the Executor/Trustee (same person) to sign and date. On page 2 there is a Part III, Qualified Revocable Trust information, that is blank. That is also fine, since there is no QRT. The question is about "signature of trustee" in Part III because there are two signature places - in the middle of the page and at the bottom of the page - and I'm over-thinking but want to make sure I do not need to tell the Exec/Trtee to sign there, as well. Anyone here know enough about these to tell me yes or no?

They are getting more creative, I'll say that. English okay but not great, reasonable scenario of illness and death of prior (nonexistent) preparer - if I got an email like that, that also referenced a known good client's referral, I would not instantly flag it as spam. (I'd contact the known good client and ask "did you give my name to Mr. X" and see what they said.) Way better than the "click here to receive $6M in Nigerian lotto winnings" type spam of a few years ago.

I've done the discount thing for years. Builds in extra where the clients are a PITA (although a few have gotten surcharges - one guy got a $50 "staple removal" charge after I spent a half and hour (and several fingertips) removing so. many. staples. it wasn't funny - after having warned him the year before not to staple stuff! following year there were paperclips - he learned). And allows you to reward the best clients with a discount. I've gotten a few thank-you notes for the discounts! Real-life 'thank you' pretty cards mailed to the office. Those get put in the client's file.

Charge them the new price, then give them a discount for superb organization.

There's the $64,000 question. Client traveled from South American domicile to California, to do research for a MA university as the MA-university employee, from mid-Jan to mid-May. Returned to South America in May. No US domicile for the year. Expenses were on a per diem; not taxable, has receipts that meet-or-exceed 100% of living expenses. Client has worked for same uni in prior years, for the same 5 month stints, as part-time MA resident living/working (teaching) in MA. This year's twist was research in CA instead of teaching in MA.

T/p is a dual citizen who, in 2022, was employed for five months by a MA university to conduct research. The uni paid salary and withheld MA income tax on the MA source income. (T/p was 5 months in the US, back home to South America where additional-but-foreign income was earned, then back again in the last few days of 2022 to move in to a more-permanent situation in a west coast non-CA state, but earned no money in those last couple of days.) Per requirements of the contract with the university, t/p did the research in California, and stayed in CA to do that work (mid-Jan to mid-May, 2022). No CA tax was withheld. T/p stayed in a short-term rental (AirBNB-esque, possibly actual AirBNB; I'd have to ask). Is this taxpayer considered to have CA-taxable income? Is this taxpayer considered to be a part-year resident of CA? And I thought the complications of the weird South American CDs the t/p holds were the worst of this return. At least for 2023 this person will be a full-time US resident in ONE state.

Driver's license doesn't make you a resident, but not relinquishing the license to be re-licensed in the new state gives the t/p a big hurdle now to disprove. Your client may be able to prove non-resident status by showing number of days in IL is below the threshold to be considered a resident (alternatively, that days resident in VA preclude legal residency in any other state). Toss in a "never realized we had to change licenses but now we have" and that might work.

On this topic, the slides are now finalized and the handouts in the group's hands for attendees.

Thank you for your kind words, @Corduroy Frog.

Hair has gone all grey at this point, @Lion EA, but I could get temporary spray-in color, just for you, if it means that much to you.

I*have* to be short, @BulldogTom else my oversized personality would bowl everyone over! This is for your safety.

Ooh, send it to me please @Lion EA so I can see what it looks like all official-like. I just sent the handout pdf's off to Bo yesterday. It's going to be a long day for me, but fun for the attendees. "He to keep the warm side inside" - attend to find out how that weird quote fits in!

You may not live forever doing that, but it sure will seem like it?

I had a client with that issue, 3 years running. Ended up calling the state taxpayer advocate and reporting it as harassment of an elderly taxpayer. They stopped. I mean, fer gosh sakes, the state sends out the funds, collects their own tax, and sends the 1099-R, and the taxpayer has to prove it?! In what universe does that make any kind of sense whatsoever?

I've noted sudden decreases after widespread arrests on a call center farm, then increases - probably when a new center is set up. Answering with a business name, "Who's calling?" or some other non-hello response generally throws off robots. But I'm thinking seriously of NoMoRobo for home and business lines. Don't know how it will deal with a fax - probably won't get through. Lots of calls here come through as a town name; if I answer those I'll start with "does the town of [town name] need accounting or tax work?" and those never get put through. If in a fey mood, I'll answer in a language not-English.

I have met Frank Agostino; a good guy. https://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2023/08/irs-backdating-of-documents-highlights-festering-cultural-rot-if-the-irs-doesnt-play-by-the-rules-th.html And for those who won't click links, Friday, August 25, 2023 IRS Backdating Of Documents Highlights Festering Cultural Rot: ‘If The IRS Doesn't Play By The Rules, They're The Mob’ By Paul Caron Bloomberg, IRS Backdating Court Order Spotlights Culture, Attorneys Say: An unusual Tax Court order requiring the IRS to report what it knew and when about misstatements in a conservation easement case, as well as mounting claims of backdating forms at the agency, are highlighting what some tax attorneys said are festering IRS cultural problems, years in the making. The Tax Court this week ordered the IRS to identify when agency personnel found out about misstatements to the court about the date that a $15.2 million penalty against conservation easement donor LakePoint was approved. ... Rod Rosenstein, former deputy attorney general under President Donald Trump, is representing LakePoint in a FOIA lawsuit against the IRS and told Bloomberg Tax he’s reached out to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration. He plans to refer to the watchdog claims made by three other partnerships—Arden Row Assets LLC, Basswood Aggregates LLC, and Delwood Resources LLC—who are asking the IRS to admit its staff backdated penalty approval forms in their cases as well. “The question is whether we’re seeing one isolated case or whether were seeing evidence of a pattern of misconduct in IRS,” Rosenstein said. “I think if you’ve looked at these other three cases, it does suggest that there is a pattern.” ... Tax attorneys say it’s the latest chapter highlighting festering issues of IRS culture being taken over by adversarial us-versus-them attitudes at the agency. Conservation easement cases have been especially contentious [Michelle Abroms Levin, a former Justice Department Tax Division attorney,] said. “What they have now is a win-at-all-costs culture, and I hope we can shift back to a ‘Let’s find a right answer. Let’s find the correct amount,’” she said. [Frank Agostino, a former IRS lawyer and Department of Justice criminal prosecutor] ... said this attitude is eroding much-needed trust in the institution and fueling attitudes among taxpayers that the agency is breaking the rules to extract as much money from them as it can. “We’re not the mob, but that’s the worry,” he said of the agency. “The IRS, if they don’t play by the rules, gets the perception of being the mob.”

Not a particularly good sign, although also not (to my knowledge) a particularly bad one. If the guy trashed the prior companies, that would be bad. Explains why I've been getting marketing emails from TaxAct as well as from Drake over the past xxx months.

Not sure if employer is required, or if employee has to fill out a form saying they are exempt.

Lots of people go work in DC for very limited times, and are considered non-resident guest workers not subject to DC income tax. However, any tax withheld they want refunded is mail-in forms only - they don't make it easy to get refunds. The Tax Book or QuickFinder may have details for you. I have one lady who works in DC for a week every year, they withhold like $50 in tax and she can't be bothered to reclaim it by mail.

If you read what I wrote, it was that "the possibility of depreciation being taken diminishes substantially." I also had a client who did it correctly on their own. Exactly ONCE in over 25 years. But the ones who stare at you blankly, ask "what's that?" and have no recollection of it.... it's a fair bet to say it was never calculated or deducted.