BulldogTom

Thanks for the update. I am really going to look at that software this year. Tom Lodi, cA

You might want to add that the elderly client had read somewhere that the RMD was not required by a new law. Because he is elderly, he mixed up the years. As soon as he found out he made the mistake, he corrected it. Sounds like reasonable cause to me. You know, like the Secretary made an honest mistake and corrected it. If it is good for him, why not your client? Tom Lodi, CA

Isn't there a new law from the bank bailout that waives the requirement for RMD's in 2008. I thought (always a scary thing) that I read that in the highlights of the law. I think I have a PPC email that I read that in. Don't go off my word. Check it out for yourself, but I am sure I read that. It may be in the new bill that is in congress right now, but I think it was in the bank bailout bill that already passed. Tom Lodi, CA

I too feel like I know most of you. But there is one person I really miss - WILLIAM TASKER. If he were on this board and still at ATX support, it would be just like home. Tom Lodi, CA

This is just an aside, as I believe you have the right answer above. But if you proceeded as you originally proposed, I would think that you would have transfered the USE TAX liability to your individual client. I don't know about New York for sure, but I think the laws are similar to that in CA. If an end user aquires goods for personal use that are not exempt from sales tax, and that sales tax was not paid, the consumer must pay USE TAX on the acquisition of that product. This situation normally arises in the purchase of goods from a vendor in a state that does not have sales tax and are brought into the state with a Sales/Use tax requirement. But I think it would apply equally in this case to the transfer of goods to the shareholder. Just adding an unrelated bit of information to the discussion. I was thinking there was something wrong with the original thought of how to treat it also, but I did not get to the right answer until I saw the other posts. But I was sure there had to be either a sales or use tax in the mix somewhere. Thanks to all for the information. I have been educated by this post. Tom Lodi, CA

But when you have no line 41 or 36 entries, you still get the error message on efile. That is the baffling part. Tom Lodi, CA

The bank thing is not a bank thing -- it is an ATX thing. They "require" that you go through their system so they can get their $10 from the client. And their banking system is set up for Taxwise, not ATX. We have had multiple problems with their banking products, and none of it relates to the bank. We did a couple of direct deposit rals, then we were not enrolled for check rals. We could not print the checks off their site and they could not tell us why. The bank did their part and sent the authorizations to ATX for us to print the checks. ATX screwed it up. And the process of getting enrolled is horrible. And when you call their support, they don't know a thing. I have worked with SBBT over the years, and they are solid. It was only when ATX forced us onto their online banking system that this got screwed up. Look back at the posts where people are having problems with the bank products and you will see the common thread is ATX, regarless of the bank. And if you look at the first line of my post, I said some of the things are not necessarily ATX's fault. I know the forms are IRS release issues and I know that CA is slowing everything down. But taken as a whole, I am not as happy with ATX as I was 2 years ago (when it was darn near a perfect season for us). I still love you KC. I am just venting. Tom Lodi, CA

I had that pop up also. I wrote in "This is an explanation" and it went through. Not sure if that is going to bite me in the butt or not. I guess we will see. Tom Lodi, CA

I heard that HRB is now charging a $29 consulting fee. When you sit down, they require you to pay $29 if you don't have your return filed by them. I guess they are tired of being shopped by people who get to the end of the process and take back their W2's. I don't blame them, but it is the first time I heard about it. Have any of you heard of it? Tom Lodi, CA

I am glad you are happy. I am not so thrilled. Not that it is terrible, and not that it is all ATX fault, but..... 1. Forms are later this year than last 2. Bank products are a disaster (for some reason we are seeing more this year than any year in the past) 3. E-file on CA is not smooth 4. Customer Support is not very helpful (even with the sweet southern accent they talk with) 5. Customer Support wait times are still about an hour 6. Misterious little bugs keep popping up and then disappearing. Nothing major, but still unexplained little problems that are fixed with restarts. 7. Some of the changes to the software were a suprise this year. Little things that are just annoying because they aren't the way they were. If you take each item, it seems like little things, and they are. But taken as a whole, I am just not as happy as I have been in past years with ATX. I got an e-mail from Drake that says they have direct to form entry now. I am going to look at it very hard this off season. I wanted to pull the trigger on them 2 years ago, but I really like the on form entry. That was the only reason I did not switch in the past. Tom Lodi, CA

The comparison sheet is a great place to look. If it is not on the 1040, look at the 3rd page of the report, the sch. A comparison. Maybe you mis-entered a deduction (hey, it happens to all of us). I caught one this year on my review where I entered 2,700 in state withholding instead of 270. Luckily, I caught it before the client saw it. Tom Lodi, CA

This is one nominee that I hope they reject in the confirmation process. She is as liberal as they come and is financed by the Labor Unions. Every one of her campaigns. Her father was a shop steward and her mother was in the SEIU for years. In her book, if you are not union, you should not be allowed to work. I would love it if Obama had to pass on this one. Tom Lodi, CA

From the bad client kid file. Patty is working on a return with several rentals. The clients bring their kid (an adorable 9 year old girl) to the interview at about 6 pm. As they work on the return, the child starts wondering arround the office. The next day, Patty starts chewing me out for errasing all the appointments in the book. But I did not do it. That adorable little monster slipped into the reception chair, grabbed a pencil and proceeded to erase all the appointments in the appointment book. ARRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHH. Tom Lodi, CA

Getting ready to go to the bank. Sweet. Tom Lodi, CA

Yeah, I know. And I have 4 returns with rental losses sitting here waiting for the form so I can e-file and bill for them. Tom Lodi, CA

Dependency is not the issue here. The issue is qualifying child versus qualifying relative. The first comes with all the goodies (HOH, CTC, EITC, etc.) and the latter only gets you a dependency exemption. As jainen pointed out, they become qualifying children when the court or agency places them in the home and they stayed there for 6 months. Take all the credits that come with it. Tom Lodi, CA

Man, I hope ATX gets that out fast. I have 4 returns sitting here waiting to go. For you big firms, that is not a lot, but for a little practice like mine, that is four unhappy clients who are not out telling their friends how great I am. Tom Lodi, CA

Margaret, I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill. It seems to me that you used a valid and defendable method of valuing the land for the 2005 purchase. Put that to bed and don't bring it back up. It also seems to me that you are using a valid and defendable method to determine the valuation of the land on the 2008 purchase. Use it and put it to bed. Who cares what it does in relation to the 2005 purchase? They are two different transactions in two very different economic environments. Just my 2 cents. Tom Lodi, CA

I am guessing - you reduce the basis. The rehab money implies that your client will have to do some work on the property, and that work will increase the basis (most likely given the amount they are crediting). The other credits sound like a reduction of purchase price to me. That is the best I have on that one. Tom Lodi, CA

That takes care of Canada, but what about his 1040? Where do I enter the pension? Does he get a foreign tax credit? Sorry to be asking such basic questions. Never had to deal with this before. Thanks Maura. Tom Lodi, cA

Happy birthday --- you old fart. I am glad I am not as old as you!!!! I don't get to 44 for another 3 weeks. Tom Lodi, CA

He is now a US citizen. I don't know when that happened. At some point in his life he was something else, and now he is one of us. Tom Lodi, Ca

I am not sure. In the box for income code, one of the forms has code "46" and the other has code "44". It is issued by Service Canada / Canada Pension Plan. The other issue is the amounts are in Canadian Dollars. How do I convert to US$ (I realize I can look up the conversion rate on a bank web site, but I am sure the US tax code has a requirement to use a certain date or something). Tom Lodi, CA

Help from those of you familiar with Canandian pensions. Taxpayers are H&W. She lives in US and recieves SS. He lives and works in Costa Rica. He recieves US SS and Canadian Pension from the Government of Canada. His Canandian Pension shows an amount withheld for Non-Resident Tax Withholding. What the heck do I do with this? Specifically, do I report it like a pension and enter it like a 1099R, or do I add it to the amounts from the 1099 SSA? Do I use a Form 1116 and take credit for the withholding? Your expertise is greatly appreciated. Tom Lodi, CA

Killifer should not have withdrawn. She was ok. Daschle was just another carreer polititican. So much for "change" in the Obama white house. It looks like a lot of the same retreads. Tom Lodi, CA