jklcpa

For anyone else that wants to read directly about what is being asked without searching through the entire conference report for it, that section is in the quote box below (and full report here: http://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20171218/CRPT-115HRPT-466.pdf

You can always take the chance that the machine won't misread any of the information on the forms. However, the 1099 general instructions do say that the 1099s should not be folded, to send them in flat. It's in Item 1 of the section for Paper Document Reporting. https://www.irs.gov/instructions/i1099gi#idm139623138743744

This site is for tax professionals using a specific brand of software not used by the general public. We do not answer questions posed by nonprofessionals here. If you have questions related to the reporting on paystubs or W-2s, you should be asking your employer, HR or payroll dept for clarification.

David, I don't want you to think I'm ignoring this going forward, but I don't think I can help you with this any more and am going to bow out of the conversation. Maybe others here will have some additional ideas or answers on this.

The distribution out of the partnership comes out at adjusted basis, in this case it would be zero. For tax purposes, the S corp's tax basis in the truck in this case would also be zero. The other LLC member might have problem with that! Right now before any transfer take place, the 2 LLC members have received equal treatment so far: they both shared in the purchase and in the sec 179 expensing of the truck. BUT, while the basis is zero and the transfer out doesn't change either of the LLC members' capital account balances, the partner receiving the truck is getting 100% of something of significant value for which he only "paid" for 50%. As a hypothetical to make the point - What if he never contributes the truck to the S corp and instead turns around and sells it outright and pockets all of the proceeds for himself? Don't you think that the other LLC member would have more than a slight problem with that?

OK, I need to clarify and change my answer slightly since the wording of the initial post made me think that the LLC was also reporting as an S corp. I reread it and see that it wasn't stated how the LLC was reporting, and now clarified that it is a partnership. Now that we know it's a partnership, with that in mind and this asset is handled as a distribution, under sec 732 the asset comes out at its adjusted basis, not at FMV, the partnership would not recognize gain on distribution, and the individual receiving the asset picks up the asset's carryover basis. In this case, the basis of the food truck in the hands of the individual would be zero. I don't have any other suggestions other than the purchase or lease ideas, but maybe someone else does. I only wanted to clarify the points above and to correct my original answer. Disclaimer - the above discussion pertains to only this particular situation where the asset was originally purchased by the partnership and is fully depreciated to zero. The answers would be entirely different in cases where an asset had been contributed to the partnership, or where the asset still has basis that exceeds partner's basis in the partnership, etc. Not getting into those hypothetical discussions here.

If he transfers the truck, it would be considered a distribution to him at FMV and the 2-member LLC would report the gain taxed at ordinary rates. I forgot to ask if there is a liability against the truck, and if so, that would reduce the amount of the distribution. Could the S corp actually purchase the truck from the 2-member LLC for its FMV? That would bring cash into the LLC that could be distributed to the owners to help cover the tax effect. I think that this LLC wouldn't be prevented from structuring this as an installment sale since your client owns exactly 50% and not "more than 50%", meaning that the S corp isn't considered a related party. If I'm wrong on that, someone here will correct me. If the S corp doesn't have the resources to purchase it, what about the S corp leasing the truck from the LLC? Would that be something they'd consider?

Here is the full text conference report from the House docs: http://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20171218/CRPT-115HRPT-466.pdf

What is the TP's ownership percentage in the two-member LLC? Is it more than 50%?

I'm on the fence and may skip this altogether because I'm now dreaming up all kinds of problems: I have a W-2 from "my employer" that is my same name plus some initials (my corporation with a 21-year tax filing history, but that is probably irrelevant to the doofus on the phone). Then there's the same cell phone account in my name for over 25 years but have an older phone, and husband just upgraded fully and so I'm not sure if the main name has changed now since he got a price for his service that adds me for $10 more, but the bill is still addressed to me. Again, that might cause more Doofus confusion! . . . and then there's the issue of not wanting to install Internet Exploder! haha, love that one!

Thank you, Evan, that information is very helpful and exactly what I needed to know!

Thank you, Lynn. I do have MS Edge that I could use without having to download another browser.

I haven't had the need to log on or reregistered since getting my new computer, and it doesn't have IE11 that the old e-services required. Does the new e-services platform still require that, or will it run on other browsers now?

As Randall said, it's fairly typical for a renewal policy with a continuing insurer to cover prior acts. When changing to a new insurer, the prior acts coverage is usually an add-on of optional coverage handled as a rider. I've renewed the same policy through AICPA/AON since going out on my own, and it covers prior acts all the way back through 1996.

MeF shutdown for business returns is scheduled for Dec 26th. I don't have the exact date on hand for when individual 1040 MeF reopens, but if I recall correctly, the official filing season opens in the third week of Jan 2018.

It's more than 20 years of free issues from Kiplinger for us.

Based on this status page for the IRS FIRE system, I'd say that e-filing of 1099s at this time is not available again until after Jan 8th. Whether using ATX, some other software, or online, don't they all ultimately go through the FIRE system or not? For example, Drake creates a file but I enter my own transmitter number and log in directly to the FIRE system and upload the file. With ATX software it's more seamless, but aren't they acting as the transmitter and still going through FIRE since they aren't going through MeF? https://www.irs.gov/e-file-providers/filing-information-returns-electronically-fire

That's how I interpreted the question too.

...when I see many familiar names start to reappear in the "Who's Online" list. I'm glad to see people returning and am very appreciative of the core group of members that contribute year round too. Welcome home!

Thanks for explaining the difference between SFP and the new Connect. I'd looked previously and couldn't find the new features.

I respectfully disagree because, as you said, the IRS didn't shift the cost so nothing was "shoved down our throats" with this. Some make a choice to purchase forms for a price rather than wait for the free ones from the Service, and some make another choice of paper-filing over e-filing of the forms. I remember the ATX program being very easy to prepare and e-file those forms, easier than e-filing the 1040s. Depending on the ATX package purchased, the W-2/1099 prep may be included with that, and if purchasing a package that doesn't have it then there are the other programs and online sites that were mentioned earlier in this topic. Personally, I've never had an issue with receiving the free ones from the IRS.

I hate the new IRS interface too. Here's a link to Where's My Amended Return.

Hi Nicole and welcome to the group. We appreciate the sharing of information, but since this is a site for mainly users of ATX many users will not be looking at this subforum for Pro Series. Also, there are probably many, or most, members that would not be comfortable clicking a link to a downloadable excel file from anyone, let alone a new person that just joined the group. For those reasons and because my list of states' EINs is missing only 7 or 8 states at this point, would you mind providing the information for those so that I may incorporate that data into my pinned post in the main General Chat forum. Thanks.

I agree with Max' post above and about possibly escalating this to a supervisor once the case is confirmed as finished and that the client is due the refund. I also agree with Jack that trying to claim the refund on the next year's return would expose the preparer to accuracy-related penalties. Doing so would be a clear and intentional violation of Circ. 230. Additionally, doing so would go against the basic underlying premise, and one that auditors rely on, that each tax year stands on its own and that a error or omission in one year can NOT be corrected in the subsequent year. It would serve to foul up that following year also, and that is not in the client's best interest. Of course, this assumes that the preparer did not, in fact, request a credit carryover of the refund to be applied as part of the estimated taxes of that subsequent year.

I googled that phone number and got many hits where people have reported receiving the same robocall. Another scam.