SCL

kea - you are not making it harder than it is - imo it is a very difficult area of tax law. esp when you add in less than 100% business use. over twenty years i do maybe 4 a year, and each time the only way i get through it is from reference worksheets (TTaxBook or QuickFinders), beating it to death, and adding years and grey hair to my life.

just to peel the onion. i think you mail (which is 80%+/- out of the preparer mainstream; but you know that, and may the force be with you). i don't think efile 'info' can accommodate this scenario? i'm open for suggestions.

20) you might wonder what b kammen would think about the queen bee with dust on her atx pom poms :dunno:

ditto my calculator - open to correction. 1) 0 tax liability, but 3000 in qual income = 300 single (x 2 if joint) & needs a return filed. 2) tax liability between 300-600 (single) or 600-1200 (joint), rebate = tax liability. 3) tax liability over 600 (single) or 1200 (joint), rebate = 600 or 1200. 4) throw in 300 for kids if it applies (you figure it out).

for me, this gets to the matter. tax prep firms with many and/or complex returns have several and very adequate tax programs (more expensive) to choose from. an intro program, following the model of parsons and even early atx, needs to address the needs of small/downscale tax prep business - then grow. for example, don't try to serve the ohio state/local market from the get-go.

Jack, you are never confused, and i would follow you where-ever. pay attention to jack. and thanks for your earlier TAX REBATE link.

this is the type of (waaaaaaaaaaay too long of an effort) that could get me to change my vote to a seperate NT forum. use good judgement. don't cut and paste, esp when the bottom line is bogus/urban legend crap.

i think last year was the first year we could (or were suppoed to?) put gross ss on line 20a - the program did it.

i did a synch with atx. it cleared up two to accepted that were showing validated for awhile.

leave as is. as someone pointed out, when the at(ex)board tried to split forums, the other forum got no action. keep things simple, and just skip if not interested.

kb15724. irs # 800 304 3107 for menu to find the specifics of the code letter. i got to the part where it said they only wanted the taxpayer and my phone # was being recorded. i hung up until i get the tp in on the phone call.

i haven't seen this one before on chit chat. i signed up for delayed credit card billing for 2/1/08. so i have recently tried to efile, and i received a "red - not authorized to transmit" notice. customer support told me i wasn't paid, but the transfer to renewal sales is not open yet. "show me the money!". i thought i did. ohhboy!

i'm in john h's line now. how much money are you talking about?

don't spend anymore time on this. since you have been paid, tell her to go elsewhere and do an amended return. then tell her bring the info back to you and you will refund your fee if you are wrong - you won't be unless the other preparer is a fraud. let her know the other preparer is a fraud, and she could be too - it ought to shut her up. it seems the 'friends' are talking about a sch c manipulation to fabricate income and deductions to max EIC and the child tax credit (or the additional child tax credit). she has w2s and not even SE income.

more of the story comes out. i know from my own experience that disclosing all the information in a question is difficult - but more info offered gets a better response. my question about info not offered: is this 1099 the only source of income? the irs does not match individual 1099's. if total income reported on this year's return is more than 1099 slips, then no problem. if the lawsuit gets more money later, report it later. overstating a 1099 for a deduction is the other party's problem.

as kc suggests, things not said or said incorrectly, affect an answer. for me, a missing ingredient that you omit is : how much is your 1099c total? fwiw (nothing), and off the top of my head, it does seem that you have an insolvency possibility - but i have not looked at fm 982. are you meaning bankruptcy, and not insolvency? good luck in getting your financial life in order.

i wish you well. this has been a $64 question to me for years. there are computer gurus who know how to do this. i'm not one. even when someone explains it, i still try to find the on-ramp - let alone get on the expressway :huh:

eci has different tests than dep. i have not confirmed the situation in my own mind, but doninusny & kc is a good indication. the only real solution is work it out and prove it to yourself.

off the top of my head - fwiw. 3rd or 4th year of new dep story - keep reading. need to claim dep to get c tx cr (off the top part). need release of claim from custodial mother.

if i remember correctly about a similar question from prior year - the problem is a phantom space or even an accidental (.) in the field. delete w-2 and reenter.

>>organizers this week>> i'm close to installing (then updating) the unsolicitated program that atx sent me. i renewed on 12/22/07.

my 2 cents for preparers who can't wait for things to settle in. i could be wrong. is this early why..why..why useful?

right-o, JH: 500+ members and counting on this resource. 30000+ other atx clients. what is going on in that world? i'm sweating it out here - even with the super-duper (smart) folks who offer their help/insights on the program and tax law. thanks everyone! btw - nicole #101, would you consider being the mother to any of my children? :)

re lloyd hudson - 2 comments: 1) the irs is encouraging free taxpayer efiling. why? they receive more revenue. 2) a state return is needed, and that requires a fee, i believe (bait and switch). my state laws are complicated, and i save clients mucho dinero. many taxpayers feel that tax prep should be free - no matter what the cost. around here, car dealerships are doing free returns to get down payments on auto sales. i was going to say 'rip off' auto sales, but some dealers are ethical - LOL.

He was taxed on his gross income that included his half of any soc sec amount that he paid. The fact that he didn't get to deduct it would make it nontaxable when received. Although to be fair, after he has recovered his cost contribution (like other pensions), then that amount could be taxed. But that would bring in everyone else who is not subject to the income limits. The taxation of soc sec benefits is a social engineering creation of congress (like most tax laws). The fact that it hasn't been indexed for these many years is what makes it unfair.