JohnH

Of all people, how to accountants and tax preparers fall for these scams? Aren't we always warning our clients about this sort of thing? If not, we should be. That alone should raise our own awareness. The sneakiest thing I've seen was a "Docusign" document I received via email. If I had been in the process of completing a real estate transaction, insurance, or other activity which involved exchanging e-signed documents, I might have fallen for something like that.

I bought two of the Brother HL-5470DW printers a couple of years back after hearing about the earlier versions on this forum. They've become my workhorses. Had been buying toner at list from Office Depot, but thanks to the comments on this thread I'm going to look for discounted toner and stop throwing that money away.

Does the client have a 10-12 year-old child, grandchild, niece, nephew, or neighbor?

Looks like there's a way to request an extension, but it requires signing in first. https://www.commerce.gov/news/blog/2018/04/economic-census-goes-online-data-provide-timely-information-health-us-economy

Over the years, I am certain I earned more by extending credit that by having a firm policy against doing so. I'm convinced that the few losses were more than offset by the additional revenue, especially at times when I was building my business. I've always tried to let my business judgement take precedence over emotions & ego, and this is certainly one of those areas where it's easy to get the two mixed up. Now that I'm approaching retirement, my attitude is more along the lines of "Rather than work for free, I'd just as soon take the time off."

At the bottom of my statements, I enter the following verbiage: "Pay Pal available: We can send you a statement via email which you can pay via PayPal if you prefer. Just call nnn.nnn.nnnn or email me at xxxx@xxx and I will follow up. If you can't pay all at one time, you can make partial payments." If they use PayPal, I just increase their fee the next year by double the PayPal transaction charge. If they don't pay, I forget about them. It was worth the fee to get rid of them. If they pay via PayPal but don't come back, it was worth the PayPal transaction charge to shame them into going somewhere else. It's silly to have to do this, but sometimes it works. I even have one client who earns over $250K but pays an average annual bill of just under $500 each year by sending me 2 - 4 PayPal payments. Some people just live their lives this way. You're not going to change them.

Switching between any input screen and the form view, as well as the reverse, can be accomplished via a mouse click or a single keystroke (whichever you prefer). Switching back & forth is virtually instantaneous - no delay for calculations to take place. As an added plus, Drake is so efficient you don't need a computer capable of launching the space shuttle in order to run it.

My journey was somewhat similar to yours (but with an ATX interim added). I was a Microvision customer until the Ultra Tax buyout. Stayed with UltraTax for the 2 or 3 years they discounted the software to stay in line with Microvision cost. But then they jumped the price considerably, so I evaluated Drake and ATX. I originally went with ATX because the "forms based" product intrigued me, but I gave up many of the features Microvision/Ultra Tax provided. During the 2012 ATX debacle, I finally took another look at Drake and realized it was actually closer to Microvision/Ultra Tax in terms of its flexibility, features, and efficiency. Although ATX worked fine for me until it didn't anymore, I now wish I'd skipped the ATX detour and had gone straight to Drake. I wasted lots of time with ATX - time that could have been better spent becoming more proficient with Drake and running more efficiently (profitably).

Well stated.

I've always considered the Royals to be on roughly the same level of irrelevance as Hollywood types & professional athletes. They are all actors playing various roles as they sit in their positions of wealth & the influence it gives them. Yet they have the audacity to frequently lecture the rest of us on how we ought to conduct our lives. They confuse themselves by thinking recognition confers competence. At least the public support of actors & athletes comes from those who voluntarily pay for the entertainment services they provide to us. But in the case of the Royals, their subjects are required to support their playacting & posturing through taxes and the force of law. Hence, they epitomize the ultimate welfare family. "We are not amused."

Rita, you're a very wise person.

I'm convinced they think of lots of things when legislation is drafted, but the timing of their thinking has a strong correlation to when & in what amount the campaign contributions come rolling in. Technical corrections become somewhat of an annuity stream for campaign financing.

But for the present, just one more addition to the most expensive welfare family in the world.

But in the snow it's smart to wrap some barbed wire around your bare feet, just to get a little traction.

Do you have the link to the Drake Forum? If not, here it is: https://forums.drakesoftware.com/forums/ Be sure to post your ATX-to-Drake questions on the sub forum here. Several of us switched over in the past few years and can probably be of help. I predict that you won't have any questions after the first season, provide you actually spend the time to learn Drake. You'll probably decide to switch to Drake completely and not look back, if your experience is like mine.

Can't fix that. When you develop a workaround, you often have to make allowances for extra input. The key question is, does the extra input produce a worthwhile result out of proportion to the benefit gained. If so, then it's critical to develop the discipline to use it wisely.

Well, as long as the note stays with the individual file, you're accomplishing what you want. The presence of an entry in that field alerts you to the fact that there's an ITIN on the return that needs attention.

You might want to keep studying it. I can't think of a reason for a vendor to provide a "Custom Field" unless the end purpose was to make any entry in that field unique to each individual tax return. Adding a column on a report is just a way of displaying the entry in that field for each return.

Great question. This morning I'm no longer digging. It's settled in my mind. My initial reasons for continuing to dig last night were: 1) Some knowledgeable people I know (both personally and on some web sites) don't make the distinction. I was just making sure that nothing had changed - 1978 to now is a very long time. 2) Sometimes my OCD just takes over. 3) I was watching Bing Bang Theory (what a great season finale !), so anyone watching that sitcom just naturally allows their brain to wander to all sorts of odd places.

You're correct, but the 1978 W&L Law Review recognizes both types of cards and clearly distinguishes between them. It is actually spot on regarding this issue and provides a clear answer to my question (unless something new has developed in the interim). In any case, I think we're on solid ground to deduct the Home Depot charges for the cash basis taxpayer, even though we still don't deduct the open account charges with most other suppliers until the bill is paid.

Leave it to you folks to steer me in the right direction. After searching on Rev Rul 78-38 I found this gem, dating all the way back to 1978. https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwj4ore1lPzaAhXBm-AKHUJBAdMQFggtMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fscholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu%2Fcgi%2Fviewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D3009%26context%3Dwlulr&usg=AOvVaw1NMoONCoUbPXKPiXg6vQiS&httpsredir=1&article=3009&context=wlulr After a cursory reading, it appears the issue revolves around the type of agreement under which the store card is issued. Whether a cash basis taxpayer can deduct an expense with a card issued under a "bipartate" agreement is highly questionable, but it is definitely deductible using a card issued under a" tripartate" agreement. Now I'm searching to see if I can find anything more recent to either back this up or negate it. It's beginning to make sense to me now, and I see why there are various opinions on the matter. Thanks to everyone for your input.

Max: That's the issue. I have one reference from a CPA firm that differentiates between open accounts and store credit cards. Their view is that store credit cards underwritten by credit card issuers are essentially the same thing as general-purpose credit cards, because of the existence of the third party. Fact is, the money is owed to the credit card issuer rather than to the store. My problem is finding clear IRS guidance either way.

Can't believe the typo I overlooked. My second sentence should read: When he charges expenses to his credit card (Visa, Amex, Master Card), we deduct December purchases in the year of the charge, rather than the year of PAYMENT. Thanks for the link, Judy. That helps.

From time to time I second guess myself on this one. Taxpayer is a landscaper reporting on the cash basis. When he charges expenses to his credit card (Visa, Amex, Master Card), we deduct December purchases in the year of the charge, rather than the year of sale. He also has open accounts with local nurseries and equipment dealers. Those expenses are deducted when the payment is made rather than when the charge is incurred. But then he also has a hybrid situation. His Home Depot branded charge card can only be used at Home Depot. I have been operating under the assumption that those charges are also deductible in the year of the charge, rather than time of payment. My reason is based on the fact that the Home Depot credit card is underwritten by Citibank, so this is essentially the same as a credit card charge rather than an open account with a specific vendor. Most years the year-over-year ending balances net one another out, so the issue isn't particularly relevant. But in 2017 the end-of-year balance on the Home Depot card is much greater than the opening balance, so it has a significant effect on the tax return. Thus the second-guessing. I've never been able to find IRS guidance on that position, only info from a couple of CPA web sites. Just wondering if anyone here can offer an opinion on when the Home Depot charges are deductible.