BulldogTom

Terry, I know you don't want to hear this, but the first thing you need to do is calm down. You are justified in your anger, but that will not solve the client's problem. I know it is the last thing you want to hear (I know this from experience) because you have every right to yell at CCH. It seems to me that a letter from you with a copy of the return you believe you filed electronically will solve the issue. jklcpa also has a place for you to look to see what happened. If that does not fix the issue, an ammended return would probably do the trick. I would love to see what happens if you ask the IRS to use its supeona power to compel ATX to produce the record of the transmission. Could be fun to watch them try to explain that one. I hate it when I can't bill for work that I have to do because of no fault of my own. It is not fair, but it is the life we choose. Good luck, have a cocktail this evening, watch a game on tv, throw pillows at the wall. It will work out in the end. Tom Lodi, CA

I did not say I would stop worrying, just that i would stop bothering you. I know it is tough this time of year. I hope your hubby is good and you can concentrate on work. I know it is terrible to get behind because your mind is off on more important things. Hopefully, more family in town will make for a more restful, peaceful life and get you some help. Tom Lodi, CA

Ah - then your client believes that they have an erroneous 1098, which is much more plausible. If he has all the checks, run an amortization schedule and calculate the actual interest to use on the A. I would guess it has been double reported because of the transactions being moved between companies. But do not file a return that your client does not believe represents the true amount of interest paid. Tom Lodi, CA

Yes it looks funny on the surface. The question is, how did she get the money to pay the deductible expenses and all of her other non-deductible expenses? If a reverse mortgage explains it sufficiently for you (no opinion on this because you did not give enough figures to make one) then tell the client to document the facts in case of a future audit. Tom Lodi, CA

Steve, It is a quirk in the software for CA. I don't call it a flaw because it is like the Alt Min form coming up automatically, even if you don't need it. The error check in ATX will tell you that if basis is the same, don't use the CA D. I am not sure why the amounts changed on your income, as it generally just populates and gives the same income figures. The one thing that will screw with you is a new client with a Capital Loss Carryforward. Entering the amounts into the Federal D does not get them into the CA D and will cause more income in CA. I would go back and check the form for the previous years and find out why the income changed. I can't remember it happening to me. Tom Lodi, CA

I have always deducted it on a rental. All costs associated with the production of rental income are allowable. MIP is a legitimate, necessary cost of producing rental income. Tom Lodi, cA

Sweet. Glad to hear everything is good and your family is with you. I won't bother you anymore. I promise. Tom Lodi, CA

Remember, it is made out of gopher wood. Would you call it the Ark. Ark? It took you long enough to respond. I was worried about you. I don't know for sure how close you are to the White river, but that thing has been making lots of news. I think I read 30 something counties in Ark were under flood watch. And especially in the north east part of the state. Glad to hear you are OK. Tom Lodi, CA

KC, Is your home in a good, high, dry place? I have been reading about the flooding that is coming your way and am worried about you. Please give us an update. Tom Lodi, CA

Isn't that the HQ for HRB? Sounds like their strategies to save tax. Good People they got. Sorry, could not resist the opportunity to take a jab at HRB. Tom Lodi, CA

Where do you enter the state adjustments for the partnership K1 on the CA return. I know I used to know how I used to do this, but now I don't know why I don't know anymore. Thanks for your help Tom Lodi, CA

This is the first I heard of this. Your tax dollars at work. Tom Lodi, CA

Donny, I never filled out any special paperwork. I was mad as hell early in the season about this add on, and I still am. It is the number one reason that I am dumping ATX. They never have been straight about this charge, it was not discussed anywhere on their website nor disclosed when we signed up for bank products. I would call and ask for the paperwork to get your money now. Get a manager and ask them to make the paperwork available now so you can get your money now. I "heard" a rumor that the $4 was going to be in the form of a credit for next year's software. I thought that was just a rumor, especially when I started getting the $4 in my bank account and just forgot about it. Now I am not so sure. ATX/CCH has not been forthright on any of this. I don't do many bank products, but I have them just to say that I offer every service and more that my clients can get at any national chain. ATX is stealing a fee from my clients, and they shoved it in at the last minute with no documentation. I will never forgive nor forget what they did. I will never trust them again. Tom Lodi, CA

Cool, glad it worked for you. Tom Lodi, CA

This is a continuation of the thread from a couple days ago. The auditor has sent the closing agreements for my clients to sign. She is giving us everything we wanted, EIC, CTC, Add'l CTC, MFJ, all 4 dependents. It all looks good with one exception. She zeroed out the spouses return and it shows an amount due, which is proper. She then added the amounts to his return. All good so far. But there is $3,130 of EIC that was "Frozen" by the IRS on his original return. She is showing that amount as having been paid in the Examination Changes section of form 4549. In the "Other Information" section of the form she has a note that says "RELEASE FROZEN REFUND - EIC FREEZE - $3130" I am concerned because the net effect of the examination changes is an amount due by my client, but when the frozen EIC is released, it is a net refund. Is this the proper procedure for the agent to follow. She says it is, and I would like to believe her and wrap this up, but I don't have a great deal of confidence in this particular auditor's abilities. Is everything OK the way she is showing it on the return? Thanks very much for your time and opinion. Tom Lodi, CA

That is really weird. I have done about 6-7 bank products and each time, my fee that is deposited in my account is $4 more than my invoice to the client. I don't know why it would be different with you. I am using SBBT. What bank are you with. It should not make a difference. Tom Lodi, CA

I think you just take it into income. There should be no penalty. Tom Lodi, CA

It comes with your fees. No waiting until this summer. Watch your bank account. Tom Lodi, CA

I have never seen a railroad employee W2 before. It has no SS or med, but in box 14 it has 3 entries: RRT1, RRT2 and RRTM. I know what Tier 1 and Tier 2 are, but what is RRTM? Is it deductible? Thanks Tom Lodi, CA

Jainen is right. You will have to prove that the client is insolvent just before the cancellation of debt. Only the amount to which the client is insolvent is eligible for exclusion. For example, if the client has 2 million in assets and 2.2 million in debt, he is insolvent by 200K. If the cancelled debt is 300K, only 200K is excluded from income. A word to the wise is to do the calculations now, before you file the return. Trying to do this in 2 years when the taxpayer has forgotten about it is not going to be fun. This is where we need to educate our clients. Don't let them say they are broke, they will forget about momma's jewlery and daddy's gun collection they inherited. Make them list everything. They should have done it for bankruptcy court, so it shouldn't be too hard. Just my 2 cents. Tom Lodi, CA

Is the difference because the interest on the bonds is IRD? I have been watching this thread develope and I think that is the problem with the bonds. A home or marketable secuitites are not IRD. Step those up. Just a thought from an unresearched point of view. Tom Lodi, CA

That kid must still be in therapy. WAAAAAAAAAAAyyyy too much information. Tom Lodi, CA

Mel, My prayers are with you. I hope your life is free of complications so that you can pursue those things that are important to you without sacrificing the quality of life you wish to lead. Tom Lodi, CA

Joel, How much do you want to bet that there will be all these really good sounding releases from CCH about how then have big plans for ATX next year, and it will come right before the early renewal period begins? All the BS veiled promises will come out about how they have no plans to discontinue MAX or the other product lines. Just sign right up for next year. BTW - are you really a Rabbi? A Rabbi who does taxes, lives in Las Vegas, and has an avatar that looks like Orville Redenbacher strikes me as a funny combination. Tom Lodi, CA

Rabbi Joel, I appreciate your point of view, but I am not buying it. CCH will want to keep us because they paid for us, but they have not shown any inkling that they will treat us with respect. Negative comments about the software, if listened to, result in better software, because the company takes the situation that caused the criticism, examines it, and tries to improve the software experience for the customer. CCH has not even acknowledged their backhanded add on charges for bank products. They screwed up the MyATX login without telling everyone what they were doing. They changed bundled packages without telling anyone. And they cut support staff for our product, which is our livelyhood, right at the beginning of the tax season. Remember how they put on the William Tasker dog and pony show on this board to calm the masses after they fired all the MAX support techs? Where is sweet willie now? On his way to the unemployment office! They used him to keep all of us from asking for our refunds. You think they did not know that they were still in the 30 day window and a ton of us would have jumped? The management of CCH is going to have to do much more than "say" they are going to keep the product and add a shell of a monitored board to earn any type of redemption for the mountain of distrust they have created. I don't believe a single word that comes from them. I am really holding out for Mel to pull off the miracle for next year. I want a company I can trust to partner with. I am not drinking any of the CCH kool Aide. Tom Lodi, CA