JohnH

Or they can file without paying (or with a partial payment), wait for the notice, and just call IRS. The phone number will be right on the notice. If they owe less than $25K and can pay off within 5 years, IRS will usually set one up right on the phone. Saves paperwork and the client gets instant verification that they are OK with the IRS.

How's this for a reply? Thanks for your concern about our health. My husband and I are fine. Hope you and your wife are well. And I hope your new tax preparer is also well. Sorry, I don't have a referral to give you. Best Regards,

Yes, Drake has the 8958. I just now looked.

Like Joel, I've also found the Drake transition to be fairly seamless once I got through the initial part of the learning curve (by "initial learning curve" I'm referring to a few days plus some time spent watching their excellent tutorials). I think it's mainly a matter of how adaptable one is willing to be. There are a few little things I miss from ATX, but the lightning speed and ease of use with Drake is well worth the trade-off. It also has some features and ways of manipulating data which I find far superior to ATX. Most of these features concern the process of expediting data entry, which is our greatest time killer. For example, their macros are simple to write and edit, which can save lots of time with routine entries unique to a given practice or state. I am doing some work with ATX 2011 on one screen and Drake 2012 on the other, and I've come to notice how slow even ATX 2011 was when seeing the two side-by-side in real time. As I've said before, the "Forms-Based" data entry is way overrated IMO. Granted, the change takes a little getting used to. But how hard is it to press Ctrl-V and Ctrl-E? It really is that simple to toggle back & forth between the Form to the Data Entry in Drake, and it works even faster than I can type this. Now if I found that my state wouldn't calculate correctly or if I had a particular class of return that wouldn't work, I'd certainly have a different opinion. But in looking at the Drake forums, I don't see any CA preparers complaining about these issues. (Or maybe they just don't have any customers in CA). And my only CA client's return worked perfectly, although it's a fairly straightforward return. Anyhow, I'm coming around to the idea that everyone may be looking for another vendor next year, either by choice or by default. I'd suggest giving Drake a good honest evaluation, knowing that any change is going to require giving up some things and gaining others. If ATX isn't an option, there won't be much out there in this price range which still provides the selection of forms and customer support that Drake provides. I'll also add that even though I'm now a Drake user, I'll still continue to evaluate other vendors in the off-season. I believe it is foolhardy to be locked into a single vendor with no other options. For a small practitioner like me it would be an inconvenience to be totally dependent on a single vendor, but for bigger operations it borders on business suicide. This season, ATX seems to be validating that viewpoint.

Next time they call, tell them you pulled their file out of the stack to answer their question, but then you placed it back at the bottom of the stack so now it has slipped further down the schedule. Then ask if they want you to pull it out again, give them the same answer as before, and take the chance that you might accidentally return it to the bottom of the new stack.

Here's my latest contribution to the "decadent" category. Just now made it myself... Treat.pdf

Much better answer than mine, but among other things I'm wondering about the original post - why an S corp would even have paid Federal Taxes (unless it was a C corp in the prior year).

I haven't tested this in a while, but it might be that your problem arises from a simple posting error (multiplied many times, of course). Quickbooks allows an inexperienced user to post directly to "Cost of Sales". If they post purchases to this account, rather than to "Purchases", then the only way QB can compensate for the error is to drive ending inventory negative. You might want to drill down into their "Cost of Sales" account and just see if there have been check transactions posted directly to that account. That won't solve your problem, but at least it will tell you where it originates. It will also make you more comfortable in making the adjustments necessary to get inventory to zero, assuming there really isn't any remaining inventory.

Do you think it would be wise for them to offer their employees a combat pay supplement for standing watch in the exhibit booth at the next few conferences?

The answer is, "it depends". (no joke - that really is the answer) Sorry if this sounds insensitive but have to ask. You sure you want to be preparing an "S" Corp return if you don't know the various answers to your question?

I remember that. The only reason I passed your Algebra class was because you provided all those extra supplies. (and the high quality of instruction that went along with them)

Three comments on the phone problem. 1) Don't give any client your cell phone number. If anyone captures it when you call them, be sure to enter their name in your contacts so you can always send them to voice mail if they call you later. 1) Turn off the ringer on the office phone and let everything go to voice mail, unless you're in the mood for interruptions. 2) Do everything possible to encourage them to switch to email. I know, some won't. But in my experience even the older clients are more likely to use email if you take the initiative (except for the very elderly). Seniors embrace email even more than young people these days, because the younger people are more oriented toward texting. I will usually find some reason to send a client an email after they drop their info off. Maybe I need to confirm a birthdate or to ask some other innocuous question. That puts my email address in their contacts, and all they have to do is click "reply" to send any questions they may have at any time. That usually gets them forever off the phone. Personally, I respond to voice mails the end of the current day or sometime the next day. But I will respond to an email within minutes, even if only to say I read their question and will need to get back to them later. All my clients know this. Once clients understand that phone messages may take a while but emails get a rapid reply, they will make a rational decision about how to communicate with you. People don't always need quick answers - they just need to know you're aware of their question and maybe giving it some thought. That saves your valuable time to give quick responses to questions which actually do command priority. Following the above, who cares when they contact you? It can be Christmas day, Sunday, middle of the night - makes no difference. I have night owls who send me emails at 2 am. Next time I turn on the computer the message is patiently sitting there. The client gets it off their mind and I can respond at my leisure. But what is really impressive to the client is when they send an email question that requires a simple answer at 8 or 9pm on a Saturday or Sunday while I'm sitting watching TV. If I have time to shoot a quick response from my phone I'll do it. Clients almost always convey their appreciation for the quick response, and not a one of them has ever expected me to be as timely the next time they sent a question. When it comes to communication, we live in a world that is vastly different than it was even 3-5 years ago. I view technology as a friend which can relieve a lot of stress - it just needs to be managed.

--> He e-mails me and says "if I were Dr. 'a Jewish name' (and I'm Jewish) I would be getter better treatment." <--- I think he told you all you need to know about his moral compass right there. I'd have decided to drop him as well.

Wonder why I've encountered lots people in my life who said they were "disgruntled", but have never met someone who described themselves as "gruntled".

So what's your point? Are you suggesting that sequestration is something OTHER THAN a 2% reduction in spending? Anybody who credits this administration with doing a good job of anything meaningful is living in a dream world. (Their skill lies in deceiving and dividing - that's where they are excelling) For example: “We have gone on record with a notification to Congress and whoever else that ‘APHIS would eliminate assistance to producers in 24 states in managing wildlife damage to the aquaculture industry, unless they provide funding to cover the costs.’ So it is our opinion that however you manage that reduction, you need to make sure you are not contradicting what we said the impact would be,” Mr. Brown, in the internal email, said his superiors told him." Here's the link to the entire article (for those administration apologists who aren't afraid to face the truth): http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/5/email-tells-feds-make-sequester-painful-promised/

I noticed it being very slow to respond when I visited about an hour or so ago. But now it seems to be working just fine here - normal speed.

Or, in those words attributed to Harry Truman when someone in the crowd yelled out "Give 'em Hell, Harry!", he is reported to have replied, "I don't give them Hell. I just tell the truth about them and they think it's Hell."

I can understand - sometimes people are offended by the truth. Doesn't change the fact that it's truth.

Sounds like a potentially desirable outcome on a national level to me. Provided we cut out BOTH major parties, send everybody home, and start over again. But right now I'll settle for a 2% cut for starters. Oh, and now more good news. Looks like the Sequester Jesters are just kidding - we have plenty in reserve after all. Our newly-appointed joke of a Sec of State just announced they found $250 million for aid to Egypt. Plus, there's plenty more where that came from - he promised we "can and will provide more". I'm sure those furloughed government workers and air traffic controllers will be thrilled by this development.

If I follow the logic of these bureaucrats, I'd cover the 2% drop by suspending my burglar alarm service. No way I'd consider cutting out a couple of Starbucks visits each week - that just isn't possible.

Something is really puzzzling me about sequestration. 1) As of Jan 1, 2013, every person in the US who earns a paycheck was forced by our government to make do with 2% less in disposable income. They have adapted and continued their lives with little negative impact. 2) As of March 1, 2013 our government must take some of its own medicine by reducing spending by roughly the same amount - 2%. Suddenly we're hearing the system will implode - air traffic control shutdowns, 3-hour TSA lines, and illegal aliens being feed from jail. We can find a way to do it fairly painlesslly. But Washington? Nope, can't be done. This bureaucratic circus speaks volumes about the economic efficiencies inherent in the private economy vs. the incompetence and inefficiencies of the way government mis-handles money in general. I think this is the lesson that Washington fears we may learn, so there's a desperate need to make it as painful as possible. Anybody else get the feeling we're being played for suckers?

You're right - this would have gone a long way toward satisfying their ATX customers. But there would have been the inevitable backlash from those who paid the full price for ProSystem FX, so maybe they calculated it wouldn't have been worth the extra grief. What's the price ratio - about six to one? Whether the long-term consequences would have been better remains to be seen. Make me think of the time I was flying on a deep-discount airfare and got into a conversation with the guy sitting beside me. We were both headed to the same destination to conduct similar business. I'd paid $150 for my seat and he had paid about $900. He got visibly upset (not at me but at the airline). But once we left the plane he was on to more important stuff. Had we been sitting side-by-side on the return flight, he may have been more inclined to give the airline some real grief over it. On the other hand, if the plane had arrived late and we both missed our meetings, the airline would have been much more sympathetic to his complaints than to mine. Not saying that they would have actually done anything helpful for either of us, but they would have issued a much more sincere-sounding apology to him than to me.

From the standpoint of damage control, I think this may be the smartest move they've made yet. If there had been a rush for the exits at 2/27-2/28 (and we really don't know if there was or was not one), this would give their customer service people the only response that might head off the stampede.

Charge by the hour. Some 80-transaction schedule D's might take an hour to input and proof, while a 2-transaction schedule D that's missing key basis info can eat up multiple hours.

OK. I think we're ready for the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TkuZ5oI9uY