Terry D EA

<<<<They went with the farm to the children.>>>> Gail is right and I think she is also right on the adjusted basis. This would be handled the same way as the property basis. The children's basis is their mother's basis so agree no gain or loss recognized.

I filed one without the 1095-A. The CSR from the market place read me all of the figures. The return was accepted and refund issued. Maybe it slipped through.

I have to agree with MsTabbyKats. There are two sides to the story and we usually only hear one side an it is sometimes difficult to remain impartial. These type of clients can definitely pull on some heart strings. I had one this year that blasted the spouse every chance they got. Had to remain impartial simply as is stated I didn't nor do I know the other side of the story.

Well there could be some type of loss here to offset any gain. Form 4684 is in order but the difficult part is to establish basis and FMV for the damaged items. I think it would be your client's responsibility to provide the basis and FMV.

<<<<That is a hard part of business but no one else let's them walk...>>>>>> I had to learn this as well and am still not good at saying pay me now. This does only apply to those long time clients who for some reason or other may be down on their luck. I am holding a check for one who has called me twice to ask me to hold it just a bit longer. That I really don't mind doing. What does irritate the heck out of me is when one of my PITA clients complains every time they get the invoice and they do have the ability to pay without question. About 6 years ago this same client told me she could get any CPA to do what I do for $25.00. I grabbed my work and handed her documents to her and told her to go find one and let me know how that works out. Well, you know the rest of the story, didn't happen and is still one of my best and largest PITA clients. I wonder if they negotiate with WalMart or the grocery store. Geez!

Holy Cow!! I read that wrong. Please accept my apologies. I didn't see the fact the 35K was after the scholarships. So, the others are correct and I agree with Randall in starting with the AOC and looking at the income to see if they qualify. Can I use the excuse of being really tired and can't wait until Wednesday?

If all of the tuition and fees were paid from scholarships and grants, then the answer is no and the amount of the distribution was used to pay the remainder then the answer is still no. If the amount of the distribution was used entirely on education then the difference is taxable income. If there was excess over and above the scholarships, grants and 1099Q distribution then the answer would be may be from your post it doesn't sound as if this were the case.

I too have filed many years back for clients. I am going both ways here I agree with Rita and Old Jack. I see it from both perspectives but still tend to lean towards it is the client's decision. It is our job to tell the client what they are required to do and the consequences if they are not compliant. Can't force them to sign anything and can;t stop them from trashing the paper copies to be mailed that we can't e-file either. Rita I am with you 100% I don't want to pay that person's taxes either and yes the irresponsible party should pay. Unfortunately, and more often than not, it doesn't work that way.

Jack I agree for the most part. I knew the sale or foreclosure should have gone on form 4797 and yes the debt forgiveness, if any, will come in the form of the 1099-C. My problem is when I enter the input for the 1099-A the program automatically does the calculation and puts the 11,122 on line 21 which I agree shouldn't go there. Where I don't agree is there is sometimes a loss on these transactions and in this case there is a loss. As for Jimdaviscpa - the program has not opened or brought the 4797 in. I am using OneDesk and I can't see where to override these calculations if I need to which seems as though I do. No bankruptcy or insolvency is involved and with that said is the 11,122 indeed COD income?

Client received form 1099A for rental property that was foreclosed on. No tenants, no rent can't make payments and you know the rest of the story. There is a loss on this transaction. Shouldn't form 4797 be used to report this disposition instead of Sch D? Also, I am a bit confused by the calculations the software is performing. FMV from 1099A = 48000.00 Adj basis = 71,000.00 Loss = 23,000.00 (This is correct and should go to form 4797??) Form 1099 A is calculating 11,122.00 which is the difference between the principal balance and the adjusted basis and putting that amount on line 21 as other income. This is the one that I am questioning.Any help to clear the fog out of my brain is appreciated.

This would be nice to know how to do. I have always preferred to roll over my clients one at a time so I know who has come in and who has not. I too tried to do this manually and was unsuccessful.

It's hard to say why sometimes there appears to be individual problems and problems that all are experiencing. At first thought, I assumed that I may have not used the 1040ES function correctly. But when I looked at it again when no one was here the same problem existed. Still haven't heard anything about a fix or even if they actually have identified a problem.

Yep! If there was significant gain or any gain the the remainder of the credit up to the amount of the gain has to be repaid.

Candy, Cheez-its, pretzels, sometimes dinner and frequently breath mints (for me and my clients) for the obvious. How many of you have a can of Lysol or Febreeze under your desk for those special but unforgettable clients?

Must be some house.

I agree with the other posts form 3115 and take all of the past depreciation as a 481 adjustment. Joan's suggestion is a very good one too.

Boy I need to change my structure immediately so I can limit my liability too.

I agree with both Margaret and Gail with this scenario. Follow their guidance here.

I can't say it any better. Thanks to all for being there.

Catherine I hope you get feeling better soon. This stuff is going around here in NC as well. My wife has been really sick the last two days and spent all day today in bed. Bad sinus infection too. We take the better or worse part of our wedding vows and appropriately apply them cause it is better to sleep in separate rooms so we both don't get worse.

Yep you got it! I gripe each and every time my wife pays our cell phone bill too. Have to pay enough taxes on that thing so someone else who should be less fortunate than me can get one free! Even though they drive cars that are nicer and cost more than mine, I hope they are glad that I have worked so hard for their benefits. Another thanks for being in the middle.

Based on Judy's response. if your client does not meet any of those criteria than no exclusion. I may be wrong but I think an exclusion may apply if sold in the first year it was converted to rental property. Too tired to look it up and someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

I spoke with Dan earlier today and he did confirm that they were aware of the issue with the MFJ/MFS tool not calculating correctly. He said they issued a patch but mine is still not working. Also, I alerted him to the problem with the 1040ES problems where the program calculates the estimated tax payments for each month as the total tax due for the 2014 year and the client would pay four times as much. Go figure that one.

I read that same case earlier today and it is definitely good to know. The language really does make sense.

Same here. Only have long time clients that claim EITC so I know them and have even taught some of them in school so answer the questions sign the 8867 and move on. If I did take a new client who is entitled to claim the EIC then yes I would ask for the necessary documents.