BulldogTom

I think that is what I figured out. And it makes sense that you don't need a W3 because it is just the check figure for the information you are sending them in the mail. If you upload the file and they accept it, they don't need you to send them a transmittal. Thanks Tom Newark, CA

Last year I filed the company's W2's online at the SSA BSO website. We did the Electronic Wage Reporting because we had nearly 400 W2's to file. Everything went fine. But I did not get or print out a W3, and I did not upload, nor do I see anyplace to upload or print out a W3 when you do the EWR reporting. The auditor for the 401K plan is asking for the W3 and I don't have one. I went to the BSO website and I don't see a place to print a W3 if you used EWR. Did I screw something up? Can I get a W3 off the website? Thanks Tom Newark

I need to do more research, because we all know the pubs are not substantial authority. I keep looking at the use of the word YOU in the quote above, and I keep thinking that means the person who took out the mortgage. I just don't want to believe that the accrued interest of the decedent can be deductible mortgage interest to the beneficiary who pays off the mortgage. The rules for deductible mortgage interest say to be deductible it must be to build, improve or acquire the home. The beneficiary did none of these things. I think the person who takes out the reverse mortgage can deduct that interest, but the beneficiary fails the tests for deductible interest. Now, it could be, (and I don't have time to look right now), that there is an exception to the mortgage interest rules for the beneficiary who assumes a reverse mortgage, but I don't think what you provided in the pub above is that proof. I think when the mortgage holder dies, the ability to deduct as mortgage interest dies with them. But I can't prove that either right now. Tom Newark, CA

I don't think so. When the home changes hands to the heirs, and they take possession of the home subject to the mortgage liability, that mortgage includes the interest that has accrued to that date. I don't think it is interest anymore, it is part of the debt that is being assumed by the heirs. Tom Newark, CA

A "real" conservation easement is a pretty cool deal for the owner of the property. I did not do the taxes on the one I was involved in, I was working for the company. A local quasi-government agency paid the farmer I was working for to agree to never allow his land to be developed, it had to stay farmland forever. This land is on a highly desirable freeway intersection. This transaction was never intended to be a charitable contribution of the value of the easement, but it comes down to the same principle, "what is the value of the easement?". OP sounds like someone has put together some kind of real estate holding company that is going to donate conservation easements on the land they hold and pass the charitable contribution through to the owners of the entity. Could be legit or could be a scam. The devil is in the details. Tom Newark, CA

Agent 99 was a hottie. Tom Newark, CA

What Yardley Said. But only 19 years. Tom Newark, CA

Congress won't block robo calls because they use them for campaign messages. Congress looks out for Congressmen before they look out for us. I bet if we set up a robot to call every Congressman's office every single day 200 times, they would pass a law, but it would only apply to government numbers. Tom Newark, CA

I saw a quick blub on the TV the other day about a guy who has invented a robo call blocker. I did not get the name of the company, but apparently he has figured out how to determine if the call is from a robot and if so it answers and hangs up. Anyone else hear about this company? Something like norobo. Tom Newark, CA

Sounds right to me the way they presented the W2. But look closely and make sure there is no CA withholding or CA SDI on the W2. If a CA company employs a worker who does no work in the state, CA will not tax the non-resident for those wages. There are 2 things at work here, the domicile and where the work is performed. If the employee is legitimately domiciled in NV, and the work was also done in NV, there is no tax to CA. As Controller in my day job with employees in NV, I have prepared these types of W2's. Tom Newark, CA

Terry, CA Community Property Law is not as complicated as you might think. The important date is the day community ends. CA defines that as the day the couple split with no intention of returning to community and in fact never resume community. Case law in the past has defined that date as the last day they lived in the home together. (There is a new law that is on the Governor's desk that would change the law, and it may be signed by now, that changes that definition, allowing ex's to stay in the same home if it is because the spouses cannot afford housing.) So what you need to know is the date that community ended. It is not the date the divorce is finalized. From there, you will know if there is a period of community in the tax year in question where the spouses have joint liability for debts. But if the split of income and withholding and deductions was properly done on the MFS returns as you say, the date that community ended would have been used to split the income and the liability for that year should have been properly divided between the spouses in that year. Is there an audit on either spouse's MFS return for the year in question? Was there a period of community in the MFS year they filed? If there was a period of community, was the income, deductions and withholding split properly during that period? Did the lawyers have anything to do with the MFS return? Is the divorce final? If there was no period of community in the MFS year, then the issue is moot because each of the spouses would have only their own liabilities for the year. If there was a period of community, and as you say, the return was properly filed with the community period properly allocated to each spouse, then the issue is moot as well, unless the IRS tries to collect from one spouse for the debt of the other. It is not part of the divorce and the lawyer should stay out. It is pure tax law and collections and if the return is correct, you should be able to show that to the IRS for your client. Not fun, but doable. If the divorce is not final, it is a whole new ballgame, because the lawyers will screw up the whole thing. Be careful, because when I have gone down this road with the attorney's, they will generally prefer to mix this stuff up with other issues (child support, property settlements, visitation, etc.) and settle it out. If your client's attorney is not well versed on the subject, they will charge your client for their education on the subject, and it will cost a great deal more than what the tax savings are to be gained. It will generally string out the divorce proceedings. Tom Newark, CA

OP says Client was the Beneficiary. If that is the case, cousins don't get a 1099R, nor do they get to roll any amount into any IRA if they get a gift from the Client. The IRA beneficiary designation form is the only thing that the 401K administrator is going to look at. They will not honor a will or trust document if the beneficiary designation has been made by the decedent. There is the human side to this. The client wants to honor the Aunt's wishes, but that wish cannot trump what is a pretty cut and dry situation from a tax law standpoint. Tom Newark, CA

I go with cash basis taxpayer. You don't have income until received. I would put it in the year it hit the checking account. Cause if the audit is for 2015, and the cash is in 2015, but the income is in 2014 and 2014 is a closed year, the auditor is likely to take the position I just did. Tom Newark, CA

I think that I like Rita's line better, hugs are for measuring for the size of the hole you need in the back pasture. Tom Newark, CA

I went there and ATX 2015 is not showing up. Only 2013 and 2014. Tom Newark, CA

Software was working yesterday. Today I tried to open and I get the dreaded "Can't Connect to the server" error. I tried restarting from the console, but it won't start. Can get into 2014 software without an issue. Tom Newark, CA

It is every 3 years, and it is a license. Supposedly, it allows me to practice before the IRS. However, without the PTIN, I cannot have clients to represent, unless all I do is representation, not preparation. The PTIN fee is a TAX. Tom Newark, CA

Sorry, I very much disagree. The PTIN has become a tax and a powerful, unfettered hammer that the commissioner can wield against tax professionals without due process. The commissioner can pull your PTIN at any time and you cannot practice because it is now required for efile, and efile is required as well. There is no appeals process to stop this from happening. You can do absolutely nothing wrong and the commissioner can pull your PTIN and put you out of business. By the time you go through the bureaucracy to get it back, too late, you missed a season or two and you have no clients left. It isn't about the dollars, it is about the power. Never forget that government power affects the lawful more than it affects the lawless. Remember, the PTIN was a tool for practitioners to hide their social on tax returns. That is what it was created for. It is now required by the IRS to practice your profession. I am for preparer oversight and regulation. I have my EA license and I don't have a problem with renewing and paying for that license. I am also for IRS oversight and competency testing as well. If we had more professionals in the IRS, we might have a better tax system. They need to stop doing the president's dirty work and get rid of the Lois Lerners of the service. If they would have just fessed up about her, rather than let her piss off the Congress, they might have gotten some funding. Now they get what they deserve. Rant over. Tom Newark, CA

Sign me up. Tom Newark, CA

Patty and I will be there at the Tropicana. If anyone is going, perhaps we can get together for dinner. Tom Newark, CA

I will not do it until the Fed's legalize the product. I will not take on the risk. There are more adventurous preparers out there who might, but not me. I am not making a moral judgment, I am just not going to risk my license for a trade that has unsettled legal implications. Tom Newark, CA

And to you too my friend. I will be selling fireworks for my square dance club for part of the day tomorrow, and then coming home to bbq some ribs and blow up some fireworks. Wishing you all a great 4th of July holiday. Tom Newark, CA

You do need two monitors. You just don't know it yet until you have them. Then you will realize you want 3. Tom Newark, CA

Look at the claws on that grey one? Holy cow, they look like they can do some damage. Catherine, I feel really bad for you. I have no advice. I really hope it plays out well for you. Tom Newark, CA

The suspended losses are released at the disposition of the asset. ATX handles this really well. Just proceed with the disposition as normal and it will flow through to the 1040 properly. Tom Newark, CA