JohnH

I had one for the 2001 year back in 2003 - at that time they had streamlined the process a little and they called them something else, but the auditor told me at the time it was "TCMP Light". The wife had a schedule C, but other than that it was a fairly basic return (one W-2 for husband, mortgage interest, property taxes, contributions, etc). The auditor did look at such things as birth certificates, bank statements, 1098, 1099, etc. It all worked out, including the mileage claimed for charitable travel (clients are very active church members). I had the wife go along to the audit. I explained that of all my clients they would have been among the top 10 I'd have hoped would be audited - she didn't seem to appreciate my humor in that regard . We spent more time getting ready for it than the actual time spent in the audit. All things considered, it was less difficult than many I've heard about, but as I said it was a fairly easy case. I just took everything I thought we would need and only handed things over as they were asked for, one item at a time. I also waited for the auditor to hand each item back before I produced anything else. Pretty routine stuff for the most part. I think the client left the audit with a new appreciation for the job the IRS does, and for what accountants do for their clients as well.

Yes. Once you set everything up, the cursor moves seamlessly between the monitors based on how far you move your mouse. When I first saw people discussing dual monitors on the ATX forum, I thought it was more or less a geeky gimmick. But once I actually saw someone using the setup, the benefits were so obvious that I returned to my office that afternoon & set up the dual monitors. Aside form being able to display last year's tax return and the current year's info on separate monotors, the setup has many other uses. Spreadsheets can be pulled across the width of both monitors, for example, to display almost twice as many columns. I send & receive a large number of attached files, and it's very nice to be able to look at the attachment on one screen while composing or reading the email on the other screen. Another benefit is the simple ablity to display the desktop with one monitor and whatever you are working on with the other monitor. You find that opening another application is easier and faster because you don't need to minimize the "active" screen when switching. Just move over to the desktop & open the other application. It takes a small amount of time to get in the habit of looking for things on the second monitor ( for example, "Print" windows will often open on the other monitor unexpectedly), but once you've noticed what's taking place it just becomes a part of your normal work routine.

Back on the old Forum, we had several discussions about various techniques to improve productivity. I learned much from those discussions, and I believe the most important lesson by far for me was the encouragement to go to dual monitors last year. I thought it might be helpful to start a new discussion about them and to again thank everyone who influenced me to make that change. I can't imagine working at my desk without at least two monitors connected to the computer. I'm now considering adding a third monitor just for the purpose of keeping my email & internet connection in view at all times while actively working with the other two monitors. I would like to hear if anyone has any comments or suggestions about latest developments or how you use your multiple monitor setup effectively.

Pacun: ---> You are completely wrong and thinking like my clients... They think that if they donate $5000, the IRS will refund them $5,000. <---- So YOU'RE the one who's been stealing my clients. I was wondering where they went...

I think it's worth noting that the heading for this part of the Forum is "General Chit Chat", not "General Chit Chat Except Politics, Religion, or Something Else That Might Offend Someone "

KC: The process is a little tricky, but he could still make money on it by holding a "Calf Lottery". If he sells 50 tickets at $10 each, he will clear $490 after expenses.

Funny how our perspective changes based on whose ox is being gored. I'm not criticizing your attitude - we all have those reactions from time-to-time. I remember serving on a church board many years ago and explaining how the minister's parsonage allowance works. The wealthiest and most vocal member of the board spoke up with a negative comment about how he wished he could deduct his utilites and insinuating that it was "unfair". He was not a client, so I pointed out that he got extra exemptions for him and his wife being over 65 (this tells you how many years ago this happened), and that the "fair" thing for him to do would be to forego that benefit since all us younger people (including the pastor) were not entitled to it. That discussion didn't go any further, although I assumed that if he ever needed to change accountants I would probably not be in the running.

You might also want to think of this in the sense that you have ALREADY taken a tax deduction by not billing them. If you billed them $2,000 and then donated the money back to them after the bill was paid, you'd be in exactly the same position as you are by not billing them. (Except for the fact that you would have paid Self-Employment tax on the $2,000 of income as it passed through your hands). BTW, thanks very much for all the time you've donated to create this forum in the same spirit that you have been helping the hospital.

I still don't see anything improper (including the back seat of the Oldsmobile thing).

Bob: I'm thinking about your commission - I want to do what's fair. Given the mindset inherited from ATX, I'm thinking I will eventually decide that only whatever is in my best interests will constitute what is fair.

Bob: I'm glad you posted that. I think I'll enter with the postcard. If I win, then that MIGHT help me make my software decision.

In a slight departure from the main topic of this thread and its permutations, but still following the political theme, I'd like to recommend the latest Charles Krauthamer article concerning the phenomenon of the 2-year political campaigns for president. The main focus & title of the article is a bit tongue-in-cheek, but a secondary point is quite good - he insists that the ordeal of the long political campaign actually does give us some insight in the managerial abilities & skills of the candidates. Political differences aside, if the candidate can't effectively manage his/her campaign how in the world will that person be able to manage the actual job of president? Much of what he says is self-evident, but in his usual style he offers a slightly different twist to the issues. Well worth reading.

Given his situation, he might want to re-think the idea of getting a mortgage so he can invest the difference. Depending upon his tax situation, the value of the tax deduction may be less than it appears since its real value is only the tax savings on the difference between his standard deduction and his itemized deductions. Plus, he will need to be pretty sure the money he invests will earn significantly more than the rate (6-7% ?) he will pay on the mortgage. The foregone interest expense is a guaranteed return, and he may learn the unpleasant truth that the risk he assumed in hopes of higher returns is way out of proportion to the potential return. And at his age & fiancial circumstances, that may be the last meaningful investment lesson he ever has the opportunity to learn. These are just a few random thoughts and may be totally irrelevant to his situation. I don't have anything to offer concerning your main questions.

As stated before, I can't bring myself to renew early this year. It isn't that I have a cavalier attitude about the decision to spend more money. I'm thinking in terms of time invested. I know that the hourly rate any of us bill can range from $80 to $200/hr or more, but assuming a low-side average of $100, the decision becomes whether to make a premature commitment of the value of one hour of time at the risk of making a mistake that will cost many, many hours to correct. Or in dollar terms, I'm deciding to invest an extra $100 in my tax software decision this year by waiting until the last possible minute in hopes that I'll forestall making a $1,000 mistake. To me, it's an insurance cost rather than a missed discount. (I may change my mind if they up the ante with the coffee pot, toaster oven, or microwave)

Either of the above works. If you're in the Return Manager, you can highlight the name & change it, or just plant your cursor & backspace. This allows you to change the name without opening the return itself, but if you press the "Enter" key after changing the name it will open the return anyhow.

I'm guessing that your client will owe tax on the net winnings (if any) in the client's state of residence only, with no offsetting credit for tax paid to LA (as would be the case for winnings which are taxed in LA).

Interesting question about the odds changing. It's true that extending the eligibility date would change your ACTUAL odds since more people would be brought into the lottery by extending the eligbility date. But if they didn't have as many sign-ups as they expected initially, then the extension might not change the STATED odds. Of course, none of this addresses the other issue that OldJack just pointed out, which is the bingo-parlor mentality that their marketing dept brings to the table. I think it's another indication of a particular mind-set under the new management. Maybe this type of stuff works well in Europe. (?) PS: I hope some of you on this forum who elected to renew early win the prizes, but I'm still holding out for a coffee pot or toaster oven.

We will all be interested in hearing what you find out from this client. Could be a legitimate reason for his wanting to switch the income to his personal return, but there could also be a host of nonlegitimate reaons involving everything from simple misunderstandings all the way up to blatantly illegal business practices. BTW, my practice has always been to feely give advice at parties, church, on the phone, etc. It has resulted in plenty of new business and enhanced friendships along the way. I find people to be genuinely appreciative and I think it pays off tremendously. The key is to know when to say "we're getting into territory that's too complicated for an off the cuff discussion and we need to meet at my office". I'll tolerate the few freeloaders I encounter because they are irrelevant when compared to the many benefits derived from sharing information when it's appropriate.

Pacun: That's an interesting question, but I can only answer for myself. I'm only responsible for my bottom line, not ATX's. As long as they have competitors, it's their responsibility to invest the necessary resources to insure that their product is as good as or better than their competitors' offerings in all areas of service, performance, price, reliability, customer satisfaction, etc. If they became a monopoly my answer might be different, but in that case we wouldn't even need to have this discussion.

Marilyn: Same here - still thinking it over. However, I made the decision weeks ago that I won't be taking any "Early Renewal" offers from ATX or anyone else - don't plan to make the final decision until 4th quarter. I don't think the $100 or so of savings is worth the risk of making a mistake. In the meantime I'm evaluating other software as a precaution and have already arranged a conversion if I decide to switch to one of the competitors. BTW, as I recall the airline ticket class action was actually a clever marketing scheme coupled with a unique way to solve a potential legal problem gthe airlines had at the time.

This is all well & good, but I want to know when they are going to throw in a coffee pot or toaster with every renewal?

Pacun: This was posted over on the TMI board and might be helpful to you. http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/fi...005-16770-1.pdf

"... the whole point of political rhetoric is to make it unnecessary for you to have to go into the specifics before taking sides. You don't need to know any economics to be in favor of 'a living wage' or 'affordable housing.' In fact, the less economics you know, the more you can believe in such things." excerpt from a recent article by Thomas Sowell entitled "A War of Words". There are numerous other gems of Sowell's usual wisdom & wit in the same article.

I think Karl Marx, Chairman Mao, Lenin, Joe Stalin, and others of their ilk did a pretty good job of showing us what "fairness" looks like when government is expected/allowed to define it. After all, enforced egalitarianism seems so logical to the simple-minded. Hillary has certainly borrowed heavily from their ideas, and it appears she just can't wait to get it right where they failed. The people who are sucked in by her simplistic pronouncements just have no sense of history, not to mention a deficit of basic character judgement.

It's neither diplomacy or extortion - it's capitulation. It may even yield some seeming results for the short-sighted, but in the long run we will pay dearly for this appeasement which is being forced by people willing to sacrifice long-term security for short-term political advantage. Our children & grandchildren may curse this generation for having sold them out if things continue on the path we appear to be taking at the present time.