BulldogTom

I wonder what changed in the last couple of months to bring up these issues? HMMMMMMM......just thinking here. Any new members who have come on in this time frame? HHHHMMMMMM..... let me think.....anyone at all who was not here 3-4 months ago who now posts on every post...... HMMMMMMMM.... let me think......someone who is so very political that the rules need to be changed after 6 years..... HMMMMMM....let me think....who could it be..... (in the voice of dana carvey as the church lady on SNL)..... COULD IT BE........SATAN.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?????????????????????????????? Close...but we all know who came on the board a few months ago and started all this crap........hmmmmmmmm...who could it be........ I hope it all works out for you. Let the dust settle and let the newbies run the threads. Nothing important being said anyway, and nothing I can offer that is not offensive anyway. Just being a red blooded, true American makes me the scourge of America to some people around here. No need to stand up to anyone who wants to show that they know everything by posting on every thread, and inserting political and racial comments........hmmmmmm......who does that around here in the last few months? HMMMMMM....I think I will retire from this board for a while. KC, please give me your e-mail.....I will miss you more than you know. Jainen, I love you man. Catherine, hope to see you in Boston next year when I drop my kid off. Jack in OH and Old Jack, you are good people, and I learn a lot from you. My brother Eli, hope to see you in Dallas. Eric, you are a good dude. Thanks for putting up this board. Too bad the DAL's have run it down. I can get this on the other board, so that is where I will go for a while. Peace out.

WTF.....do you ever really read anything. Or do you just like reading what you type. You really amaze me with your __________. The whole point of the post was that those lazy, unionized, government employee liberals who are spending so much time harassing honest, hard working tea party conservatives should be spending more time reading the tax law they are supposed to administer. Just another example of social experimentation in government gone horribly wrong. Taxed, do you really have to respond to every post on the board. Ever heard the phrase "less is more". And in your case particularly, a lot less is a lot more. Tom Hollister, CA

Non-recourse loans will not generate COD income. However, make certain that they have not refinanced, because, generally, only initial purchase contracts are non-recourse. Tom Hollister, CA

I would love to see the pictures, but I don't click on links from unknown sources, even if you are promoting them. Post one of them on the thread so I can see what the hell you all are talking about. Tom Hollister, CA

Got it today. I guess my e-mail telling them I was not a member of the Tea Party did the trick. Tom Hollister, CA

Ah, but you are wrong. I would not have a say in how the money is spent at some national office that doesn't give a rats @$$ about what I think. And right now I have absolute say over how they spend my money, they don't spend a dime of it. Tom Hollister, CA

Not unless the partnership agreement says so. Like if the agreement says the profits and losses are based on percentage of capital in the ps at the end of the year. It all comes down to what the agreement says. Tom Hollister, CA

I have a problem with NAEA and any of the EA societies. While I think they are good for the EA community, they don't promote the designation. I bet 1 in 10 Americans know what an EA is. I bet 10 in 10 Americans think that a CPA is always more knowledgeable about tax law. When I see real advertising and improvement in the perception of the EA designation, I will join. But the only way to protest the lack of community education is to vote with my lack of membership. Tom Hollister, CA

Not a member. I guess I will just pester them the old fashioned way, every day a call and an e-mail and cc my congressman. Tom Hollister, CA

How many of those were really unregistered preparers using TT over and over again? Tom Hollister, CA

Think about it. How about if one of your clients said "I have a kid that I can't use on my tax return, can I let my business partner put my kid on his tax return?". It is the same concept. The partnership agreement spells out the flow of profits and losses to the partners. You can't just change it because it would work out better tax wise for the partners. However, if the partners wanted to revisit the partnership return and for some type of valuable consideration sell a part of the partnership to another partner so that in future years he can take advantage of the percieved benefits of more ownership, then they can do that. But the partnership agreement is the rule for how profits and losses are allocated to the partners. Tom Hollister, CA

Yeah, changing the percentages so that one person can take a loss that he is not entitled to per the partnership agreement comes very close to tax evasion. I think I would have a problem with that. Tom Hollister, CA

Multiple phone calls, multiple e-mails. No response. Just get the answering machine at the OPR office. No response to daily e-mails asking for my new card. I started cc'ing my congressman on my e-mail requests. Won't do any good. I wonder if they are targeting conservative tax preparers now? Maybe I will get a 30 page questionaire asking about the political affiliations of my clients? Tom Hollister, CA

Typically, speaking only in CA, the State Fund auditors are a bit more picky. They tend to do more employee interviews and site visits to verify the information that we provide them. Private insurers generally hire out an outside audit firm. They tend to be a bit more easy to work with. Less field visits and employee interviews. This has just been my experience. BTW - working on my audit papers for my day job company right now. CA and NV payroll. Private insurer. Tom Hollister, CA

Not familiar with NY, so I stayed out of this one. But I have a lot of experience in CA. I have been handling CA w/c audits for the last 15 years. If I can ever be of assistance to you, I would be glad to offer anything I can. Just let me know. Tom Hollister, CA

Agree. He reported more than the 1099 was for. It did not rise to the level of a business. Be ready for the letter from the IRS seeking SE tax, but do nothing right now. Tom Hollister, CA

I would not do that. I would have a slot put in to the side of the house. Those are very sensitive tax docs and you are leaving them outside. If word got around that you had all the information for an identity theif would need sitting in a lock box outside, they would try to steal it. Maybe would not happen in your neck of the woods, but I would not chance it in CA. Just my 2 cents. Tom Hollister, CA

That sure sounds like a racial slur to me, as Mr. Rangel is black. Tom Hollister, CA

Document the rents, put the 1099 on Non-employee comp and then back it out on the return, and report it on rents. Wait for the letter. Send in the documentation. Wait for the response. Answer questionaire about political affiliations with the payer (OK, maybe that won't happen). You will spend less time doing it this way than trying to get the 1099 corrected. Tom Hollister, CA

Eli, Booked my hotel and registration for Dallas IRS Nationwide Tax Forum. Will be staying at the Gaylord Texan. Still need to book my flight, but that will happen in couple days. Hope to see you there. Tom Hollister, CA

You should be very nice to Medlin. He has been a gracious contributor on this board for a very long time and his input on Payroll issues is invaluable to those of us who have been here a long time. His software is known to be very good for the target market he serves. I understand his support is top notch as well. He makes no bones about the market he is after, does not try to please every single potential customer that his software is not a fit for, and, most importantly, does not lie about what his software will or will not do. Be careful how you talk about him and his product. Tom Hollister, CA

This is exactly the type of beta tester they need. The jerks at CCH need to see what their mistakes did to your business. You are the target market their product has served for years. I hope they are smart enough to see, and that you are not so bitter about what they did to you, that you would be selected and they would listen to your input. Crossing my fingers that you are selected. Tom Hollister, CA

John, I am willing to bet joanmcq did not know that. She is not the type to put a statement out there that she knows to be untrue. I don't always agree with her politics, but she has always been a stand up kinda person on this board. Just my 2 cents. Tom Hollister, CA

joanmcq, the are not applying under 501 ( c ) 3, they are applying under 501 ( c ) 4. This has been a scam since the United case handed down by the supreme court. It is a big way to raise funds for your political activities and not have to follow campaign finance laws. It is also a way to reward doners by giving them jobs at these organizations. It has been abused by the right and left, dems and repubs, and independents as well. It is mostly a sham. The issue is that the IRS singled out a group that had one political leaning. They intentionally targeted the right, and in particular the tea party. If it had been every application, I don't think it would smell as bad as it does right now. It also coincided with an election cycle, which is very peculiar. Someone directed those IRS employees to screen those applications the way they did. It could be a manager at Cincinnatti, or someone at IRS in Washington. I don't think some low level civil servant just decided to do this and no one knew what they were doing. In 2011, congress held a hearing and specifically asked Commissioner Shulman (sp?) if they were targeting groups and he said no. He is gone, but the lie is now exposed. If he did not know, he should have investigated at that time. Apparently, sometime in late 2011 or early 2012, the criteria changed from "tea party" to "constitutional education" as the trigger for increased scrutiny. Why did that happen? No one is claiming they made the change in policy. Again, the story is low level IRS employees trying to get through a mountain of paperwork. I don't buy it. Someone at IRS directed this. At what level they were at, I don't know. But it is clear they wanted to target the right. And that is the issue. All we want to know is who directed this to happen. Tom Hollister, CA

Well, if she hadn't fallen over backwards and gotten amnesia when they asked her to testify, we might know. Tom Hollister, CA