Catherine

OK; I did some more research on this one. The client I have has a big refund due; waiting a year to get a letter saying "we didn't get the 1310" when they obviously DID get it is not an acceptable option to me. If you have a court-appointed PR, you DO NOT NEED the 1310. What you do need is a pdf of the court appointment appended to the return. The software companies largely insist on the 1310 because the IRS rules are NOT clear as to whether the pdf (that the instructions say to append) is enough, or if they want a paper-filed return even though the 1310 instructions say nothing about that being required. So the work-around I'm going to use is this: Form 1310 with choice C (no court-appointed rep) plus whatever question responses are needed to allow e-file. PDF appended to the return showing the court appointment, and Disclosure statement (8275, yes? it's been a while since I've needed one and you guys all know the form I mean) stating I answered the questions to allow e-file since instructions say to attach pdf; not that paper-filing is required. May add verbiage about not adding to their paper-file backlog for a straightforward final decedent return. Still debating this one - include this or leave it off? Comments, concerns, anything else I should deliberate on including the disclosure? Let sleeping dogs lie?

Local colleague did that some years ago for a non-profit corporation (some association, not a charity). Took her for-EVER and of course they did not appreciate her work or her bill, even though she told them "this must be done" and they agreed. Hope your client appreciated all your hard work!

Ye olde "make the return correct, despite what the program wants to do." Times come when that is needful. This sounds like one of them.

Because some well-commissioned "investment" advisor told her it was perfect for someone in her situation (whatever that situation is).

Massachusetts is still dithering; nothing official. Typically they DO tax unemployment, but have voted on NOTHING as of today.

And the parents will blame YOU for not filing the return now.

Tell them in no uncertain terms that IF you agree to keep them (uncertain at this time) that they are going on extension and you won't touch a thing until June. They are to get the prior returns and/or full information from the prior accountant and NOT contact you until the information is in their hands. Or they go elsewhere now. Pick one. You have thirty seconds. Twenty-nine. Twenty-eight. I have NO time any more for jackasses who expect me to pull a hat out of a rabbit.

Judy - CONGRATULATIONS on finding out before that return went out with your name as preparer, that the clients were lying scum who do not deserve your time or expertise. They would only taint you by association. Anything you said to them was most likely far more mild than they deserved to hear (after all, they sent you more after, right?). My prayers for a full and speedy recovery for your husband. And strength for you, to stand by and help him. Take a nap, put the phone on silent, and make a vow to fire any/all PITA clients this year. (We're real close with two back-to-back; I think we're going to try the jack-up-the-fees trick and see if we can drive them away, though.) I really liked the way @Lion EA put it - Q6 2020. Wow, is that a perfect term for this craziness, or what?

I use Dissenter browser (based on Brave) and very rarely need to switch to any other. But sometimes I have to choose to allow pop-ups.

A lot of browsers these days automatically block pop-up windows or other types of fill-in forms. She may have to lower her security settings (or you may have to, if you help her) for that one site. The settings are usually per-site so for the most part you don't have to reinstate them afterwards. I have a couple of sites with pop-up login pages where I had to specifically allow the pop-ups to pop-up.

You HAVE to check the tax treaty. For most countries, it's ordinary income here - but not for all. Tax credit F 1116 almost always works better than Sch A.

Good way to describe it! I'm going to borrow that, Abby.

This is something I've NEVER understood about the 1310. The instructions read (working from memory here, at wrong computer) that if you DON'T have a court-appointed person, you can e-file, but if you DO have a court-appointed person, paper file only. Seems absolutely positively 100% back-asswards to me. The court appointed person has a fiduciary duty; the random non-appointed person may well not.

Hey, there's no reason not to use their own rules to your advantage.

I have not - but then I only have experience with very small firms. My problem is the other way - trying to revoke POAs for former clients. I've sent in I don't know how many revocations yet I still get letters for these folks.

The official procedure is to take the originally faxed in POA (no word what to do if you *mailed* it in), write "REVOKED" all over it in heavy marker, and fax that to the CAF unit. I've done it for several clients over the years. It has NEVER stopped me from getting notices for them, annoyingly.

I get the Boise X-9 "Splox box" 20-lb, 92-brightness, which is a half-case of paper in ONE box with NO separate reams. I can pick up a half-case without help, and not having to rip the paper wrappings of reams is nice, too. None of my printers will take a full ream, so that inner wrapping is a detriment rather than a benefit.

The trick is that a non-CPA, non-EA preparer can ONLY represent the taxpayer for returns that s/he has prepared. No other years.

For a $300 fee, sure.

"No one considered" in large part because those making the laws have NO IDEA how the income tax system works - they're lawyers. Not real people. Certainly not accountants!

Then you want a 2848 and make sure you specify on it the tax year in question, the CP2000, and also civil penalties. Those should go on three separate lines on the 2848 so there's no question. In the column for "tax form" you can leave it blank or put "1040 series" for the first one. Think about if you want to go back or forwards a year - in case there are carry forwards (from prior or to following) that could affect the other year's return, having it on the 2848 right from the start can streamline the resolution.

Well, there's a data point. Thank you! I always thought if it was a live account, the bank would take it. Even if the names didn't match.

Never heard of it, but I'll be interested to hear what you find out, whenever that is.

And if it had been TEOTWAWKI, she would have forgotten all about the cash. Which would have been worthless anyhow; in that situation she'd have been better of with barter-ables like cigarettes and liquor. LOL.

There is a provision in Drake (I dunno about ATX anymore) where you can list a dependent and check a box for "do not claim dependent: HOH qualifier only" so look for something like that.