Catherine

I know people who were the same boat. Money that was supposed to support the kid instead goes to fancy vacations for custodial parent alone (no kids in tow), fancy clothes, fancy dinners, etc. Bad-mouthed non-custodial parent terribly, as well (so stingy, doesn't pay what is supposed to pay,doesn't care about you, blah blah). Agreement was for each parent to pay half of college; one paid half, the other made kid take loans for that half. In the end, the kid (now grown and long out of the house) will have NOTHING to do with the spendthrift parent and - after years of estrangement from the other due to believing the bad-mouthing - now has a great relationship. So it came back to haunt them, in spades. But it was nasty to go through. Have heard other nasty stories, as well.

If the client gifts the daughter with the money for the system (watch gift limits for filing gift tax return), the daughter can then take the credits.

For the most part, (and you *must* read the docs to be sure) anything that is tied specifically to child expenses and/or expires when a child reaches a specific milestone (age 18, graduation from high school, leaves the private school, whatever) is considered child support. Alimony can NOT be tied to child milestones. But I am not a lawyer and don't even play one on television - and these things can change from state to state, as well. So check with an in-state attorney and check those court documents!

My understanding is also that the magic number is $50 (or more) difference in tax. Really, under that, it's not worth their time to process. States may be fussier. And definitely fix it going forward, starting with updating that address!

Drake says it is a piggyback; can't e-file if the federal cannot. Phooey and piffle.

Had a return rejected by ND because of a federal rejection. However, the federal rejection was because the spouse's ssn was used by someone else, so it is not a rejection I can fix. Are we stuck paper-filing ND, or can this be e-filed separately?

I have not seen e-file rejection for just switching the order. However I have seen time and time again that estimated tax payments do NOT get applied to the surviving spouse's account if that person has been the second name. Now I warn folks about this, because the last thing an elderly widow/widower needs is a nastygram from the IRS saying they owe $16,000 that they do not, in fact, owe.

I just got the SAME reject error on a return I just submitted an hour ago. NOT a surviving spouse case; both are alive and well. Form 14039 here I come. Blarg.

Here's another one for you, with a couple of stories to go with it. Keene HS does an all-night graduation party for the kids, and their big fund-raiser is a "Dancing with the Stars" with local notables; a local dance studio provides the professionals. Gwen's assigned partner this year was Steve, one of the local policemen (last year's partner was a firefighter - we tease her that she should go back next year and insist on an EMT, to have a full sweep of emergency service personnel partners). Steve's mother got very ill during the spring and he was away, and as a result Gwen & Steve only got half the time to practice as the others - and they took second place. The other bits of the story are that all the sexy moves in the dance were put in by Steve's wife, and that Gwen's dance costume is one she designed and made herself, last summer. Hustle

Are now up on YouTube! Sorry for the delay. The link here is to the Viennese Waltz; no routine, just a couple of quick rehearsals and a general idea. The male dancer who was supposed to be part of it - well, long story, and he couldn't and there had not been any choreography. So the head of the local dance studio, and Gwen, pretty much made it up on the fly in the week before the performance. Viennese Waltz

Very silly!

Sounds to me like you could make a case for adjustment to basis, therefore part of the property sale back to the bank. After all, there would have been NO payment aside from the imminent foreclosure action.

They hide when you look for them. They come out of hiding *only* when you give up and call for help. It's happened to me so often that if I can't find something right off, I start thinking that the best use of my search time might be to put out an apb to the forum.

I also put foreign pensions (UK, Switzerland) on Line 21. Yes read the tax treaty; lots of good info in those. Yes foreign tax credit is likely. If the ONLY holding is a pension, it is likely that the FBAR (FACTA; whatever they're calling it this week) is NOT actually required. Pensions are paid out to recipients but are generally NOT in the person's control, segregated by their name, and most likely there is no "account balance" the person ever knows of. Those disclosure requirements are for accounts the client has *some* measure of control over. For pensions, the only control they likely have is submitting a new address to send payment to; there is NO control over the account itself. So, no reporting requirement.

What's a potamus?

The whole topic of the privileges and powers of juries is fascinating once you give it more than the most cursory of looks. Glad you found it informative!

Don't forget to check out the "Fully Informed Jury Association" (fija dot org) for excellent info on juries and their rights, responsibilities, duties, and privileges. Those are significantly more substantial than judges and lawyers want you to know. Would LOVE to see you in Boston in Sept!

Lion is right. I switched to Drake and really like it. That does NOT mean it's the right program for you.

No swimming down, unaided, in air...

^ Not my circus, not my monkey.

Synchronized. Think three-dimensional dancing. Synch swimming to Led Zeppelin

Right here. I don't look good naked anymore

Especially with the large amount and the federal regulations on large transfers, you should be able to make a case to waive at least part of the penalty. Good luck!

It's probably still the case (I switched to Drake during the 2012 fiasco) that if you sync with EFC, all the e-files you had previously marked as "complete" get un-marked complete. So make a list of the real outstanding ones first and you can mark all and just unmark the one or two.

I think I did. The client was an elderly man who thought he lost a checkbook and so called the bank to stop payment on a bunch of checks. One of them was for taxes... We sent a letter asking them to waive penalties, included a new certified check, gave all the details. They took the cash and (so far) we have had no correspondence asking for more money. But that was only two months ago, so we might still hear back.