Catherine

Very funny!!

I used Tax Act when I first started my business and it's great for the price. Its' weaknesses (I still subscribe to the Tax Act newsgroup) remain part-year and non-resident returns. You must buy the 1040 package separately from 1120, which is separate from 1065, etc. Haven't tried any fiduciary returns with them and don't know if they even support those. They don't support W-2 or 1099 preparation, to my knowledge. But it's very much like ATX in the hop-from-line-to-field, it has excellent error checking, and decent tech support. Definitely worth a look. Catherine

It has to be completely repealed, as one of the provisions of the law is that major sections of it CANNOT be amended by future acts of Congress. As for doctors only being able to participate in government sponsored programs -- that WILL (not may, will) be the end result of the provisions that systematically destroy and dismantle the private care industry. And regardless of anything else, this will be a fiscal disaster. Here's a clip of what happens after you take out the accounting chicanery, as reported by the CBO. The fiscal stuff starts about 1 1/2 minutes into this 2 1/3 minute clip: CBO numbers And a longer, more detailed, but slightly earlier version is here (it's missing the last correction by the CBO to announced "adjustments" after this was taped): Health Care as Ponzi scheme

Not quite; they already HAVE all our bank account numbers, courtesy of all those 1099-INT's.

There is a HUGE difference. You can choose to go to anyone (who will see you) and pay them out of pocket. And then argue (or not) with the insurance company later. Hold a fund-raiser. Thumb your nose at them. Feel smug, ticked off, and/or superior. Whatever. With government controls, you CANNOT make that choice; you can only go to whomever they authorize, for whatever treatment is mandated/approved. And if that's not right for you -- tough. As for the "arbitration" -- every disagreement becomes the equivalent of an OIC application, and we all know how many of those are approved. When my younger girl was born, we had a midwife. At home. Not covered by insurance. Our choice (and a good choice, for us). We paid ourselves and have NEVER begrudged the cost. My chiropractor does not take insurance (and his rates are only $5/visit more now than they were twenty years ago). Neither does a friend who is an acupuncturist (and her visit rates are about the same as the chiropractor's rates). Both tell me that IF they accepted insurance, their rates would more than DOUBLE because of the extra people they'd have to hire just to chase the insurance companies and forms. Does health -insurance- need reform? I've said many times that YES, it does. But strangling the system wholesale is not going to help anyone in the long term.

And why on earth would -anyone- volunteer for four years of college, four years of medical school, a year of internship, three years or residency, plus the additional 3 - 7 years to specialize -- even without the hundreds of thousands of dollars in loans -- in order to work in a field where the government tells you who you will see, how you will treat them, how much you can charge, where you will work, and how much of that charge you can keep for yourself? If you're crazy enough to think -that- is a good deal, I'm not sure I would want you treating me! Are there reforms needed? There sure are!!! But applying the same "fixes" that have lessened health care outcomes in most of the rest of the world is not the way to go. Our couple-years-old health care law in Massachusetts (that the national law was largely based upon) is bankrupting us. You don't see it because the Federal government has been heavily subsidizing the way-more-than-expected costs. Those subsidies will end, and we'll be on the edge of collapse just like California. And the entire country will follow if this monstrosity is enacted rather than repealed. We've been living the future -- specialists are closing up shop and leaving the state (or medicine, entirely). Doctors aren't taking new patients because they're up to the limits of how many they can cover, and wait times for appointments are longer (so ER's are still over-used since you can't GET a doctor's appointment; they're booked with people who were sick two weeks ago). Health insurance costs are skyrocketing WAY above national averages (and the whole idea was to spread coverage through a bigger risk pool and lower costs). More and more people are requiring the state-subsidized insurance and the costs are crippling the state, taking revenue from other areas (like road, bridge and dam repairs). And the state's biggest insurer just posted its' biggest state LOSS ever -- so much for funding out of "high profit margins".

Sounds like a call to tech support is your best bet here.

Not to mention 139 Trillion in unfunded social security and medicare obligations AS OF TODAY. And those numbers are just going up. We won't be able to afford anything if we destroy the economy and financial system. Greece is near collapse from years of deficit spending and unfunded obligations, Portugal, Spain, and Ireland are close behind. England is shaky. France and Germany will be severely affected by a Greek collapse -- and we're heading full tilt down that SAME unsustainable path. We have to give up the notion of free anything -- or start planting medicinal herbs in our gardens. Willow bark tea for the end-of-tax-season headache, anyone? Foxglove for the palpitations? ;)

We have Party 1/Big Government plus taxes with Social Agenda 1, and Party 2/Big Government plus (very slightly lower) taxes, and Social Agenda 2. Census info: What is required

Liberal USED to mean someone who supported individual liberty. But now we're getting to some place we can agree on -- so here's a couple different ones for you. R. J. Pestritto, "American Progressivism: A Reader" and (same author) "Woodrow Wilson and the Roots of Modern Liberalism". Democrat or Republican -- it's all the same. Who has bought whom, and for how much this time? They are BOTH in the business of gathering as much power and control for themselves, to push their own agenda. And that agenda has nothing to do with "the greater good" or "equality" or "protecting the planet" -- or any other pseudo-sincere-sounding drivel they can abuse to cover the true agenda -- which is increasing the power and control centered in a political elite, who in turn owe their allegiance to their funding sources. Certainly not to us or the the Constitution they swore to "preserve, protect, and defend". Winston Churchill said, "With integrity, nothing else matters. Without integrity, nothing else matters." There is almost NO integrity in our so-called "leaders" OR in the lobbies and special interests that fund them. Allowing them to take more power is madness.

Yes, way overdue. But once the government is the ONLY health insurer, good luck getting ANY dispute resolved in your favor. It'll be like getting an OIC approved -- at BEST.

jainen -- try reading "Liberal Fascism" by Jonah Goldberg. Just give it a try.

And the other side of it is this: we have a very good family friend who was diagnosed with Stage 4 kidney cancer. This is, like ovarian cancer, one with almost no distinct symptoms until very late. They found it when he went in for a shoulder injury -- there was a weird spot on his shoulder X-ray. In Britain, Stage 4 kidney cancer patients are told to put their papers in order and say goodbye to their families. In this country, he underwent a very difficult experimental treatment course, mostly NOT covered by insurance. Today, four years later, he is status "NED" -- No Evidence of Disease. And has become a world expert on electronic patient records, to boot. How did they pay? They held fundraisers. Their church held fundraisers. And even filing bankruptcy (had they been pushed that far) would have been FINE with them considering their alternatives at the time. So NO, I do NOT want the government involved in ANY way with health care.

Many thanks to Lion and KC! I think the Mass return I can do without the duplication of returns -- but had determined that the other two would need to start by duplicating the original. I very much appreciate the duplicate-it-twice idea; I hadn't thought of that twist. And, yes, I'll charge them for the extra work. My husband keeps telling me I undercharge, and now you guys are ganging up on me, too, so he must be right. Catherine

Young couple. She lived and worked part-year in NJ. He lived in NY part-year but worked in NJ while finishing school. They married and moved to MA where they now both work. MA is a straight part-year resident return. But how would you folks approach the NY and NJ returns? I can't file her as a single part-year NJ resident; she's now married. I can't file him as single NY part-year resident and NJ non-resident; he's now married. Filing them as part-year or non-residents of both states (NY/NJ) doesn't accurately reflect the year, either - she never lived or worked in NY; he didn't live in NJ. Thoughts?

Fifty-six completed, fifteen waiting for e-file authorizations or acks, twenty-nine in process and/or waiting for further information from client, four ready for final review, about twenty-eight not in-house yet (most of whom have called to say they're late; the others are mainly my standard eight who call on 4/14 wanting extensions). Lots of folks real late this year.

Thank you, my friend!

Interesting that there are 520-something views of this thread, but only 16 votes.

Janitor Bob, hope you have a VERY

CONGRATULATIONS on your son's engagement!! Thank you for the response. Funny how things make more sense when your head stops pounding. Eventually I switched to printing stuff until I gave up for the night, but I was worrying that issue like a terrier with a fresh bone and couldn't make sense of it. I could see the pieces, but it was just a jumble. I hate migraines; they really scramble your brain. Catherine

You did indeed, and I was able to get the document, too. Congratulations!

Thank you; that makes sense. Catherine

Hi folks -- plodding through taxes all day despite an absolutely splitting headache. This client got a couple hundred $$ from a securities litigation settlement. Stocks held are in a regular account, not an IRA of any kind. Still owns all shares; hasn't sold a one since the original purchase several years ago. So far as I can think at the moment (which isn't far, let me tell you), this isn't ordinary income but rather a basis adjustment and should be on Sch D rather than Line 21, yes? But -which way- does the adjustment go? Basis addition, because it's getting taxed in 2009? Yes? I tried putting a cold cloth on my head but it just steamed all the cold away in about two seconds.... thank you all.

Has anyone else noticed that the Schedule D import sheets and carry-forward pages (08 to 09 AND 09 to 10) print out THREE times in a return? Even though in the print manager listing, they're only there once?? It's happened to me now on about five returns -- ONLY where I've used the Schedule D import from csv files. And the EFC this year seems never to connect on the first attempt -- it sits there, bombs out, and the goes through flawlessly and quickly on the second attempt. Catherine

Hope you have a VERY