JohnH

Rita: You took my advice?? Without waiting for someone to verify it? I sure hope your computer doesn't act up in the next day or so - I'd be overwhelmed with guilt.

Sometimes, Excel 97 will cause my computer to hang up. Cursor won't work in any other open applications, and it does weird things in Excel itself. The only thing I know to do is the "Three-Finger Salute" (Ctrl-Alt-Del), which gets me to the Task Manager and I have to manually shut it down, then reboot. Even the shutdown takes a couple of extra steps becaue of how Excel scrambles the computer's brains. I don't bother to report it because MS just slaps my hand & says I'm using ancient software (like I didn't know that already). I'm not suggesting you actually do that in your situation, unless someone here who is more knowledgeable than I happens to step in and recommend it in your case.

I think that's the point. Having a date on the statement would help confirm that the statement was indeed on hand prior to filing the tax return. That would be helpful information two or three years from now in an audit, when memories are fuzzy.

Or she could have been in the Vanguard Total Stock Market and she would have been guaranteed to do as well as the average of the US stock market. Fees would have been pennies on the dollar ($1.70 per thousand, to be exact), and she would have been exposed to zero decision-making risk, only market risk.

I'd say the "Printed On" date is as good as, or better than, a date at the top of the statement. I've already seen two statements this year that didn't conform. With one of them it didn't matter, because he has canceled checks for all his gifts and none are over $250 (even though the grand total is in the thousands). I told him the non-conforming statement is better than nothing, but not by much. He definitely needs to keep his canceled checks in case of an audit. The other one had a couple of gifts over $250 out of a total of about 20, so I gave him a copy of the court case. I suggested that he would want the conforming statement unless he is OK with leaving the over-$250 gifts at risk. He's going to speak with the (volunteer) financial secretary this Sunday. We will see what comes of that. Meanwhile, his return is on hold.

Maybe it will turn out that the best thing for her financially is to file MFS. (Just wondering here if they are actually married. ?? )

I have the client give me the contact info for the W/C auditor. If there's an email address, I email them the info, either by filing in their form and sending them a scan, or my preparing my own worksheet. I also attach the quarterly reports and any other info they need as a part of the scan. If there's no email address on their contact info, I call and ask for their email address or fax number. For my state, most of the time they are glad to have the info emailed to them. I password protect the file and then call the auditor to give them the password. On the rare occasion when they must meet in person, I have the auditor come to my office. Either way, it's billable time, and a lot more efficient that trying to relay this info through a clueless client.

Yes, I understand. I was just commenting on the IRS - not on your point, which was a valid one.

True KC, but I think they're too busy worrying about whether tax preparers dotted every "i" and crossed every "t" on a return claiming EIC (and fining them when they don't) rather than busying themselves with this sort of stuff. I'll bet if someone sent this in to IRS, it would wind up in the trash can.

I can see where this thread is headed - now it's going to get milked for all it's worth.

I don't think IRS cares about whether you are harmed (or whether I am).

Well, they already did it with Office. Wonder why they made an exception there? (I'm thinking someone saw the handwriting on the wall). Nobody is ever happy with their market share - at least not if they want to survive.

Every time I see the title to this thread, I seem to feel an irresistible urge to start singing an Andrea Bocelli/Sarah Brightman song and mixing English & Italian.

I'm transitioning, so some things are still running on a PC. (Drake & QuickBooks, for example). But the Mac has several PC emulators, which I'm going to evaluate after tax season is over. Some are free, but I'm looking at one which costs $130 because it seems to offer the most seamless transition. I do think I need an emulator which doesn't require you to reboot. The MS Office program for Mac works exactly the same as the PC version. And I can switch flash drives from the Mac to the PC and back without taking any extra steps. So I'm already covered with Word & Excel. I don't use Power Point since Keynote is far superior to it. All in all, I wouldn't be surprised to see myself completely out of the PC market by summer, except of course for archival and legacy stuff. As time goes on, more and more software providers will find that they need to develop a Mac version or else lose a large segment of their market. I say this because the traffic is definitely flowing toward Mac, not away from it. After a month of using a Mac, I'm beginning to see why.

I agree with you, Rita. I still like Office 97 for speed and functionality of Excel. At least you don't have to click on two or three icons to do a simple task. Good grief, it's a spreadsheet! There are just too many bells & whistles on the later versions. As for Windows and associated hassles, I'm becoming more and more happy about the changeover to Mac. I think I'm going to keep moving in that direction.

In looking at the forms, I'm thinking the W2's are prepared in-house. There's nothing to identify an outside payroll provider. I'm not really into turning people or companies in, unless there's some egregious illegal act going on. I don't see where anyone is being harmed by this, even though it may not be permissible.

That is interesting. This W-2 is from a large company with thousand of employees. I'm surprised their legal dept would let this get by them unless it is permissible. It appears that the company produces the W-2's (not the tax prep company), but for some reason the company agrees to provide the tear-off.

Or time to switch to MAC.

First one of these I've seen in maybe a couple of years. An employee's W-2 form has a tear-off coupon offering them a discount on their tax preparation fees at a national chain. It's actually a part of the W-2. I suppose the tax prep firm is paying all or part of the cost for preparing the W-2 forms in exchange for the advertising. It offers them $30 off their tax prep fee or $50 off whatever they paid last year if they switch from another firm. Interesting marketing ploy - I guess I'm surprised there aren't more of these.

What does "required" mean? Is the child going to be kicked out of school if they don't bring the supplies? Pooling of the supplies is important here. Some parents will buy much more than what is on the list, while others will buy nothing. But if the supplies were not set aside for the use of the specific child, I think it is a valid contribution.

I disagree. Donations of cash or goods to a public school are deductible. The parent should save the receipt for the purchase, as well as the canceled check or charge card receipt, (along with the letter from the school detailing what type items should be purchased if they still have it) . List it under Non-Cash/Check contributions showing the school as the charitable organization. No after-the-fact receipt or acknowledgement from the school is necessary. There are many charitable contributions which are deductible without having an acknowledgement from the charitable organization when paid by check or debit/credit card. One just needs to document the contribution payment properly. It is also important to ascertain that the organization is a qualified charitable organization, of course. The after-the-fact documentation issue arises only when the amount is over $250 for a single gift. This business of having receipts from the organization keeps coming up, and I'm convinced that there is lots of mis-information circulating among tax preparers on when a receipt from the organization is required and when it is not. Notice the wording from Pub 526 in the following paragraphs, especially where it says "unless you keep ONE of the following" (#2 is "one of the following", but so are #1 and #3): Cash Contributions Cash contributions include those paid by cash, check, electronic funds transfer, debit card, credit card, or payroll deduction. You cannot deduct a cash contribution, re­gardless of the amount, unless you keep one of the following. 1. A bank record that shows the name of the qualified organization, the date of the con­ tribution, and the amount of the contribu­ tion. Bank records may include: a. A canceled check, b. A bank or credit union statement, or c. A credit card statement. 2. A receipt (or a letter or other written com­ munication) from the qualified organization showing the name of the organization, the date of the contribution, and the amount of the contribution. 3. The payroll deduction records described next. Then, a couple of paragraphs afterward, it describes the $250 threshhold and the higher record keeping requirement which kicks in. For under-$250 contributions, the receipt from the organization is a nice thing to have because it helps establish that it is indeed a qualified charity, but the receipt is not necessary. There are many other ways to verify the legitimacy of the charity, especially since Google is so close at hand for anyone with a computer. Whenever this conversation occurs on a tax forum, it makes me wonder how many people are denied a legitimate tax deduction by their preparer because the preparer has set an arbitrary requirement which is not called for by IRS.

I wouldn't use it. It seems innocent enough, but there's little doubt it's a breach of confidentiality. What isn't entirely clear is whose confidentiality is being breached. There is a procedure for obtaining it, and a procedure telling you what to do if it is refused. I'd follow that procedure.

Jack: I think I'm detecting a trend here...

After watching a cat chase its tail for at least 5 minutes, two thoughts came to mind: 1) "Cats must be simple minded - they're so easily amused." 2) "I just spent 5 minutes watching a cat chase its tail."