Sara EA

Prior to EIP3, you could go to irs.gov and look up your EIPs. Years back you could also look up special credits with an IRS tool. Wishful thinking here, but it would be great if IRS would make both payment amounts available online.

Gail, did your client's debit card perhaps get stolen and used by a thief? Anyone get one and know how they get activated? Is it easy for someone else to do? And how did IRS decide who gets a debit card? I have one client who got the 3 stimuli payments all three ways--direct deposit, check, and dr card. I find it hard to believe that so many people just threw them out. When an envelope contains a plastic card, you can feel it. When you get a credit card the month your old one expires, it too comes in a nondescript envelope. Do people throw those out too?

This is overkill. When a business is audited, the first thing asked for is bank account statements, so that info is available when there is "need to know." If they actually looked at just about all bank accounts, there would be so much data it would be impossible to mine anyway. As for hiring more employees, we all know how badly the IRS needs them to conduct audits, answer the phone, open correspondence. We never thought about the people who do those things until this year when there aren't enough workers to get them done and it's affecting us and our clients.

The income was paid after death, so it is income in respect of a decedent. Report it on the 1040 to satisfy the computer matching, then back it out with the notation "IRD to be reported by EIN xxxxx." Put the estate on a fiscal year, beginning on the date of death and ending Nov 30 2021. You can use probate and legal fees as well as your fee as expenses, maybe taxes on the land while it is in the estate. If everything is sorted out by then, the estate can close and the remaining income will pass through to the beneficiaries, who are likely to be in a lower tax bracket than the estate. You can file the 1041 before Nov 30 using a short year if everything is settled earlier.

I have had clients get IRS notices when they reported IRA contributions but the 5498s showed otherwise, so they do match them with returns. I don't know if they do anything with the ones showing Roth contribs, as evidenced by my client with a seven-figure income and Roth contribs for years.

I remember reading that with the Dec tax law changes and the Dec-Jan 3rd stimulus payment, the IRS didn't have the time or resources to coordinate the computers that contained the stimulus with the 2020 tax computer systems. Therefore all returns that claimed a rebate recovery had to be hand reviewed, leading to huge backlogs in a department that typically cleared its inbox every day. The delays caused many refunds to be paid after the 45 day statutory period, so many got more than they thought because interest was added. I believe the interest was paid back to April 15 because in their haste, congress never considered that the due date was changed to May. Like everyone, I've been getting several of these letters recently. One was from a guy who got a bill from IRS. My notes showed that he supposedly looked up his stimulus amount and I used the figure he gave me. When he called about the letter, he said he looked it up and IRS was right! I always queried every client who gave me an amount that the software didn't predict or who said they got nothing. Most looked it up and agreed with my calcs, some didn't and are getting letters. We can't trust ordinary people who never even glance at their bank statements to go back and try to figure out what's in there. Next season our questionnaire is going to have two questions at the very top: How much did you get for stimulus and how much for advance child tax credit, with a warning that their return will not be started unless those questions are answered.

IRS actually did go after one of the big fish, Liberty. A few years ago they shut down several huge franchisees who owned a lot of offices. They also went after corporate. The owner, John Hewitt, had to resign and tender all his shares. His sycophants were removed from the board and their replacements made some of these decisions under court orders. Does anyone know what happened to Liberty franchisees? I see some of their offices around, but I believe the company has now become a franchisor for diverse businesses like vitamins and rental centers. I just wonder how the tax franchisees are faring.

No back door in this case! A contribution was made to a Roth and recharacterized to a traditional. That cannot be undone. See the code section cited by Danrvan. I have doubts that the broker said it was too complicated to keep track of so forget it. Clients hear what they want to hear, or fill in blanks in their misunderstanding. Vanguard likely explained that the client would now have basis in the IRA and would have to keep track of it by filing 8606 every year. Client likely heard that to mean too much paperwork and blamed Vanguard, who by law cannot convert a recharacterization. OP gave the client bad advise to recharacterize the contribution instead of withdraw it, then contribute to a traditional--a contribution can be converted, not a sum already recharacterized. As for the consequences of leaving it in the Roth, who knows if the IRS is watching. I recently posted about a client who has a seven-figure income and has been contributing to a Roth for years without my knowledge. When I found out about it this year and warned him of the excise tax, he decided to leave it alone and he'll pay up if they ever catch it. I made copious notes about that conversation.

I looked it up. A conversion can only be done from a traditional to a Roth. You can't convert a Roth to a traditional. A recharacterization is when you contribute to one type of IRA and change it to the other type (in other words, you make a contribution to a Roth, call it a Roth contribution, and then decide to characterize it instead as a contribution to a traditional). Neither can be undone. If your client had told you about this before May 17, s/he could have withdrawn the contribution and then made a traditional IRA contribution and done the back door. Too late now.

Vanguard is right. Since TCJA it is no longer possible to unwind a conversion. Your client converted a Roth to a traditional, and I don't think that can be recharacterized back to a Roth. Prior to TCJA it could be done. I had a client who kept recharacterizing Roths to traditional and back again during the same year every time the market moved. I had a million spreadsheets trying to keep track of it all and was glad when the law changed just because of him.

Am I the only one who has clients who have Roths and never think to tell us? A client took a $92k Roth distribution this year. All I knew about the account is that there was a big conversion amount in 2019. This year I finally saw my first 5498, which showed a balance twice as high as the conversion so I worked with the FA and discovered that the account existed since 2004! The FA could only give me the last 10 years of contributions and one other conversion. I did a ton of historical research on AGI and contribution limits. For most of those years AGI was way too high to contribute to a Roth. There were no annual backdoor Roths. How did this client with seven-figure incomes some years get away with this? I know IRS pays attention to the 5498s because clients have gotten letters saying they didn't contribute to an IRA when their tax return said they did. ("Gee, I thought I did.") Do they not check those same 5498s for excess contribs to Roths??? Anyone ever had a client get caught doing this?

Is the attorney confusing an LLC with a corp? An LLC is a Limited Liability Company, not a corp, and limits the individual owner's responsibility but doesn't eliminate it. A corp is a different animal altogether, and if your client ever sells the property it can become a tax nightmare to sell real estate within a corp. I agree, buy an umbrella policy.

You originally stated that the businesses were reported on Sch C and Sch F. The trust and estate now own the businesses and report them on their separate 1041s. There was never an S corp or any corp and there isn't one now. QSST doesn't come into play here. That election is usually made when a shareholder in an S corp dies and that ownership transfers to a trust, which S corps can't have as owners. You may have over-researched this, but look at all you've learned that you never knew existed! I do that all the time and finally realize I have to drag myself away from the big, big picture and focus on the small piece in front of me.

Good decision, cbslee, because starting in 2020 IRS requires tax basis reporting. If you can't prove it, basis is zero. I had a partner once who always took out more than his share of income, got his basis down to zero, and had to pay tax on excess distributions every year. He thought he was getting away with something by submitting receipts for golf club memberships, family cell and internet plans, etc, to the partnership, which reimbursed him. Other partners were not happy to realize he was taking out more than his share. Could that be the case with your client Darlene?

Maybe annualization works for those in highly seasonal businesses, but I have never had it work out for a client. Even clients who took a huge distribution in say the third or forth quarter saw little benefit, especially at the state level. Anyone else noticed this? This is a lot of work, so the hour or two it takes can't be billed against the $10 savings. I rarely do them anymore.

You can only have one entity type. You have an estate and a trust, each of which files Form 1041. Just because the businesses didn't have income doesn't mean they didn't have expenses. Also, both the trust and the estate may have other income that necessitates filing. When the businesses are distributed by the trust and estate, the new individual owners can choose S corp status at that time, but not now.

If you took straight line, there is no depreciation recapture. Instead, basis is reduced by the amount of depreciation allowed/allowable, increasing capital gain. Accelerated depreciation is recaptured and gain taxed as ordinary income, but that's not the case with your client. And yes, part of the gain will be taxed each year. At this point I wouldn't worry about the land. If the entire property was depreciated, too much depreciation was taken so gain in increased. If you went back and figured proper depreciation, land basis wouldn't change so the end result should be similar.

Same thing happened to one of my clients. It is unacceptable that people get a notice, freak out because they think their identity has been compromised, and then can't reach anyone. I had one last week that gave the option of faxing the info (all income and withholding docs). Have they changed their approach, or were these returns being held up for different reasons? We will never know I guess.

I disagree with denying the IRS the power to regulate preparers, but first let me disagree with Tom. The IRS did not release those numbers of wealthy people. If I'm wrong please direct me to your source. Statistics are released on national tax filings, and the identities of some of the people at the top may be guessed because there aren't many who make $55 billion or whatever a year. That tax info can also can be gleaned from public records (like when companies bid on projects and have to disclose tax records of officers, etc). The focus on conservative nonprofits was in my opinion entirely justified and part of the required legal process of vetting nonprofits to make sure they fill the bill. Many of the groups that lost nonprofit status had no public benefit purpose but operated mainly in the politics arena. Some legit organizations that really do some public good got caught in the net, but that didn't justify letting pseudo-nonprofits off the hook, which is what happened and continues. As for Frog believing IRS will just shut tax prep offices down at will, I really don't think so. Until recent years, the IRS has treated tax pros as stakeholders and often said it couldn't carry out the tax laws without them. The new commissioner and Sect of Treasury seem to voice the same. I have attended seminars given by the Office of Professional Responsibility, and they always assured the audience that they don't go after people for a mistake here and there but look for patterns. Like when the normal audit selection process pulls five of your EITC clients and every one of them says they don't have a business and don't know how that Sch C got on their return, then they pull maybe 100 more; If the majority of them have the same issue, a case against the tax pro is opened. OPR is an office by itself and not necessarily affected by understaffing and overwork in other parts of IRS. I firmly believe that licensing will improve accurate filings. Right now taxpayers have to trust that the person doing their taxes knows more about the law than they do. At least the license will weed out those who don't necessarily cheat but just don't know what they're doing. If you know of a preparer who's been cheating for decades, too bad IRS audit rates are down so much because of lack of money and staff. We had a couple of CPAs in our area who did the same thing for years and are now out of business thanks to IRS auditors. And I have read many times that the accuracy rate of returns in states that license preparers is higher than elsewhere. Sure there may be a few outliers like the one near cbslee, but perhaps that firm was taking on clients that were beyond their level of expertise? I have had several clients who came to me because their prior preparer said their return was getting too complicated for their knowledge level. Some preparers just won't admit it, which is what you saw. Licensing at least proves a minimal level of competency, which is more than taxpayers have now.

NAEA membership is expensive, but their education is less costly than NATP. Here is VA the local chapter of NAEA has had a few really good seminars for free. These appear to be live luncheon courses where those who attend have to pay (they get lunch included). They've opened these up to members to attend online at no cost. Makes it interesting for the speaker, who's juggling a live audience with an online one, but the ones I've experienced have been very informative and you can't beat the price.

I love their periodicals. Tax Pro Monthly covers recent events like tax law changes, court cases, etc. and picks some topic and shows how to do it, e.g., foreign earned income exclusion, forms and all. The quarterly journal is full of interesting and helpful articles. I find their education overpriced and many of the seminars were a bit too basic for me but probably just right for others depending on what types of return you do. I find membership well worth the price.

This is what happens when the IRS is given more and more to do, facing sudden tax law changes and pressure to "get the money out there," using antiquated computer systems and not having enough staff. If any one of us was facing this at our jobs, we'd quit. IRS can't do that but can't do all that congress demands of it without the resources. I agree with the Taxpayer Advocate who for years has beseeched congress to adequately fund the agency.

CT started this practice, and its history tells you to beware! The entity must pay 6.99% for each partner/shareholder (the state's top tax rate that usually applies to people who make $1 million or so). Initially only 93% of that got passed through to the individuals. Made sense--the entity deducted 7% from its income and the individuals got 93% of the payment because the income passed through has already been reduced. Now, however, the individuals only get 87.5%, so the state is keeping the difference (a disguised entity tax?) Also, entities must pay quarterly and electronically--no excuse if they don't have any money like some small entities (like a partnership that has to pay say $3k quarterly but only has $2k in the bank at the time--what to do?) While it sounds like the state is trying to help folks overcome the SALT limit, it's a money grab. Some states only require the tax on nonresident partners whom they might not otherwise hear from.

IRS has been unhappy with the back door approach for years but congress won't change it. Who knows, maybe most of them take advantage of it? Heed Danrvan's advice if the client already has a traditional IRA. Say you're over AGI and contribute $6k to your traditional that's nondeductible. You can't just pull that $6k out and convert it to a Roth. If your IRA balance was $100k and you convert the $6k, only .06 percent will be treated as basis and the rest will be taxable. Also be aware that before this year, people 70 1/2 or older couldn't contribute to a traditional at all, so the back door was closed.

I do a partnership and the individual returns for the partners. All of them have their personal tax liabilities direct debited from the same partnership account, which is in the name of the partnership and doesn't have any of their names on it. Money comes out on time, every time.