JohnH

Click on "Foms", then "Customize Master Forms" Call up the Client Letter Go to "Return Cover Sheet" tab Modify the appropriate line (s). Go to "Returns" and choose "Save Master", then "Close Masters". (This field could not be changed in the earlier versions of this year's program, but they opened it up about a week ago after some of us complained. So you'll need to be sure you've updated - otherwise it won't work)

OK. Yes, now I see the direct connection base don the original post, although I disagree with your assumptions about how the problem has evolved.

There are plenty of working people who are deserving of welfare - the "working poor" we hear so much about. A comprehensive approach to welfare which would include elements of the EIC would be much more productive in moving people off the welfare rolls and less subject to cheating at all levels. EIC continues to enjoy strong support in Congress simply because it buys votes. Other areas of tax fraud are irrelevant to this discussion. We could always start a separate thread for each and every one of them, but throwing that matter in to th is discussion is nothing but a bad attempt at diversion.

I don't have any problems with the EIC or most other similar forms of welfare for those who are truly in need of public assistance. I just think it should be administered by the department of social services rather than by the IRS via tax preparers and RAL providers..

Don't feel embarrassed about the governor. Based on my experience in local politics many years ago, I'm confident that your governor is the rule rather than the exception. He just has the bad fortune to have been caught speaking graphically about what happens all the time - experienced politicians are generally a little more circumspect in how they discuss routine bribery, payoffs, and special favors. By the way, has anybody heard from Rahm Emanuel lately?

Nothing wrong with nepotism as long as you keep it in the family.

How much are you willing to pay me for a password? --- Gov Blago

Maybe this will help: http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OACT/COLA/QC.html

The HRB ads are so-so. Sometimes they're irritating, other are cute. But what really gets my attention is the "Lady Liberty" standing on the side of the road in her green nightgown & crown waving at cars as they go by. Now that's high class advertising for ya.

He isn't obligated to deduct mortgage interest or any other itemized deductions. IRS won't care if there's a 1098 in their system for someone claiming the standard deduction.

I vote for #3 for two reasons: 1) I'm an EIC agnostic 2) I believe Pedro senses there's something wrong. Aside from the flaky nature of the situation & information, his intuition is running up red flags based on the client's demeanor & behavior. That's why he posted this question in the first place.

The free version of pdf factory doesn't offer it, but the purchased version allows you to use the security feature. Clicking on it will allow you to enter a security code necessary to open the file. I usually use the last 4 digits of the client's SocSec#. This enables me to tell them in the email how to open the attachment without compromising anything.

Looks like a job for Jackson Hewitt or HRB to me. At least that's what would happen if she walked into my office.

I agreee with jainen. If you're not paying a small estimated tax penalty to fed and state, then you're not setting up your withholding or estimated tax payments properly. California has shed new light on this theory and is making it even more worthwhile.

I don't consider a client who happened to run out of 8109 forms to be a PIA - I consider that to be an opprtunity to help a client who has a need. It's called "client service", and at a cost of 42 cents for 25 of these opportunities, I think that's probably the most cost-efficient investment in goodwill I can make. So cheap in fact that I'll do it for anybody's client, not just my own. Now if the client is callng me every month or two with the same problem, then he's crossed over to being a PIA and I'll deal with that in a more appropriate manner.

I like pdf factory from FinePrint. http://www.fineprint.com/ Cost is about $50

Maybe this would be a good place to post a note when the program version changes. (I sometimes forget to update and need a reminder). Today's update required a program restart - I now show Version 2008.6.0.134

-->>> I try to accommodate my clients, but their last minute emergency due to negligence is not my problem. <--- I like your attitude & support it completely. A couple of my clients tell me their former accountant followed that same philosophy.

You could contact other accountants in your area to ask if they have any spares. If your client doesn't obtain an 8109-B today and it's a payroll tax deposit, he should definitely try to get it paid within 5 days in order to limit the penalty to 2%. This might also be a good time for you to order some 8109-B's for future client service purposes. You can order 25 at a time on you letterhead. I always like to keep a few on hand for my clients and for other tax pros in my area. Once time I gained a new client because I could accommodate someone, and it cost me nothing but a stamp. (Of course, that meant that his former accountant lost a client)

I think Schedule R was the result of legislation not actually designed to do anything significant, but which enabled a few politicians to brag about how they were looking out for the senior citizens by sponsoring a huge tax break for them.

Charlie Rangel said not to worry about this minor little misunderstanding. Things like this can happen to anybody.

You make a great point. Anyone who doesn't know their way around a balance sheet & double-entry accounting probably should not be preparing a corp tax return to begin with. But there is still a difference between having the information in your work papers and actually submitting it to the IRS. That's the distinction I make.

I also respectfully disagree with the proposition that completing the L and M-1 when not required has anything whatsoever to do with reducing audit probability. We are speculating here, right? If the form is filled out incorrectly (whether required or not), then it certainly can flag the return for more scrutiny. But a properly filled-in L and M-1 when not required does nothing to decrease audit probability, and it could increase the probability slightly. I say this because even if the return is properly prepared, it's possible the data could be entered incorrectly when it reaches the service center. A data input error on their part could cause the return to be pulled for examination even though the preparer did everything correctly. As I said, there's absolutely no reason to give them any info they don't require.

I don't advocate not DOING the balance sheets, but as stated before I don't FURNISH the info to IRS unless they have a right to it.

I don't. Giving them unrequired info is nothing but an invitation to ask more questions. If they want anything not required on a form, they have the client's address and plenty of postage stamps. (I apply this reasoning to all tax forms)