mcb39

Yes, and they are sending out update e-mails on a VERY regular basis. They are trying to help.

Create the Organizer for 2009 in the 2008 Program as always. Remember, there are two this year. They have brought back the mini; which so many of us were asking for. It is possible to open both Organizers in the 2008 return; then pick and choose the pages you want and print. Or, if you want to waste paper and toner, just let the program print it all.

Hi Buddy.........it takes us all a while to get in the groove. I did all of that setup on my desktop last week, then had to figure it all again yesterday when I loaded to laptop. (I guess I should edit "all of us" to read "some of us"). Anyhow, glad to see you again.

Good for you elfing! If our clients are documenting their income and deductions, there should be no reason to fear an audit. Often they are just questioning something out of the ordinary, such as too much mileage for the amount of income. However, if the client has logged and can justify that mileage, the IRS will accept it. This has been my experience anyway. In any case, I would never worry about an audit in your client's case. If he is questioned, you just tell the story as you have done here. Believe it or not, there are more frugal people out there than one would expect.

Thanks, MAS, I knew I had read it, but couldn't find it and don't have my research materials with me.

He does not have to have income in order to receive the credit if all of the first time homebuyer rules apply.

My right eye was 20/50 one week after surgery. Aren't you going to miss those drops? My husband had a slight reaction to one of them and had to have it changed; doing better now. Am at 4 times a day now, but only one drop instead of three.

Well, add me to the "cast of characters" as I sit here computing with a lens in one side of my glasses and nothing in the other side. Next surgery scheduled for Feb 3. This one has gone so well, just a bit longer adjustment time than I expected. Could read fine print the first day though. Distance vision was a bit fuzzy for a while, but that is coming around too. I can see a big difference between yesterday and today. If your Dr. recommends it, so do I.

Sure glad that you came back. Now I don't have to remove you from my "friends" list. Hope everything has gone and is going well in your personal life.

Aren't you just as busy as he is, or even busier? Have him come to your office. He is the one who wants the paperwork and he should be paying for it before he picks it up. I still have ten months of bookkeeping for a client who died in Dec, 2008. His widow has been here a couple of times for consultations, but she has never picked up that bookkeeping or (as far as I know) filed taxes for 2008. If she calls now, she will be asked to pick up what I have and take it elsewhere. Sometimes it is better to lose or fire a client than to try and deal with him.

A full exemption may be claimed for a child born at any time during the tax year, so long as the child lives momentarily and the birth isrecognized as a "live" birth. Another example: A child is born on Dec 31, 2009, and dies in January 2010. A full exemption is allowed for the child in both years. I have never heard of a child being born on 1/1 being able to be claimed on the prior year return. However, I have had children born on Dec 31, who are able to be claimed for the entire year. My two quotes above were taken from the 2010 US Master Tax Guide, Paragraphs 137A and 149

We added my HP2035 to Wireless laptop which has Windows 7. Had to download driver for Windows 7 64 bit from HP website. Worked immediately. At the same time, it works with my XP desktop with original driver.

Wisconsin is a Community Property State but does not have that requirement.........YET! Yes, any of those are possible depending on the circumstances....and what the market can bear. I try to keep things as simple and beneficial as possible for my clients. We are in a highly economically distressed area and I have very, very few clients with above average incomes. I would add that this economic distress did not just develop this past year, but has been progressing for at least the past seven or eight years. I only have a handful of clients who are not struggling to some extent.

They are supposed to be setting up a search page on the IRS website, where we can check to see if the taxpayers received the $250; just like we were able to check on the Recovery Rebate Credit last year. I have not checked to see if it is there, but that is what the IRS speakers told us in school last fall.

It is your answer. I have a client who has been renting, cannot get a bank loan at this point; but owner is willing to sell to him on a land contract. A land contract, if properly executed, is a legal and binding vehicle. This client is going ahead with the purchase (per land contract) and does qualify for the first-time homebuyers credit. I have another client who has purchased two rental properties on land contracts. Of course, these do not qualify for credits; but they illustrate that he did purchase the properties on the date of the lc and the seller is merely acting as the "banker". He has since been able to get conventional financing on one of the properties because he had built enough equity into it. Often, executors of land contracts will charge a much higher rate of interest because of the risk factor. Many years ago, we purchased our first home in this manner. We had a land contract with the seller for two years; at which time we were obligated to get conventional bank financing and pay him off. We were responsible for all upkeep, taxes, utilities, etc.; and defaulting would only have resulted in our losing our original (small) down payment and the equity we had built. I have seen nothing in the IRS regs that tells me that this type of purchase is not a legal first-time homebuyer purchase.

If the taxpayer obtains the benefits and burdens of ownership in a seller-financing arrangement, the taxpayer can claim the credit even though the seller retains legal title. (e.g. a contract for deed, installment sales contract, or lang-term land contract) This is taken from The National Income Tax Workbook for 2009 for Wisconsin. In addition, remember that the credit is based on the date of purchase and not the date of occupancy except when the residence is constructed by the taxpayer. I would say that this is a definite "No".

I don't think you have any choice unless you hold it until this distressed RE market turns around (if ever). It is what it is. You cannot just put a price on it. If you have proof of FMV on the date of death and choose to sell it at a loss, wouldn't the IRS have to accept that you have a LT carryover loss for however many years it takes?

Quickfinder; page 7-15, as well as 1040 Express Answers state that "the basis of an inherited house equals FMV at the time of decedent's death, or the alternate valuation date, if used." You would probably use an alternate valuation date if you had done any improvements (increase) or something caused the house to lose value (decrease). Also, remember that inherited property is always considered to have been held long term. You could also realize a Capital Loss. What about the valuation on the tax bill for 2009; which should have arrived by now. They always state both the Assed Value and the Fair Market Value. I don't think you need to be overly concerned here unless you are realizing a very large gain or loss. IMO

I echo Deb to a T. I also thank you, Jainen, for your support of us "little guys".

I have used both options and they both work well. Good question, though, to bring this feature to the attention of others.

I put them on 2 Schedule Cs with the income and expenses split. This way both spouses get the advantage of SE Tax which goes to SS; and here in Wisconsin they benefit by the Married Couple Credit as they both have income.

That pretty much describes my business and I would venture to guess that would include many of the other preparers and posters on this board.

I don't believe that anyone here is slurring the ethics of professionals on this board or elsewhere. Some of us may have reacted in self-defense because of our experience. Nobody is chastising the education or expertise of Attorneys, CPAs and EAs. The fact is that some of these professionals are NOT automatically qualified to prepare tax returns because they chose to move on into other fields and not stay current with tax laws. I, myself, have some CPAs as clients. They would not begin to assume that they know more about tax law than I do. As for attorneys, most of us have had tax experiences with them a time or two. It all depends on whether they have stayed current with tax law; and many of them have not. As for EA certification, my belief is that practitioners who have pursued this title are to be admired and have enhanced their Tax Preparer credibility by taking and passing this difficult test. I have considered it myself over the years and am not afraid of it, but because of the distance I would have to travel and my age, I am now out of that loop. My apologies to anyone who has taken offense, and thanks to those who understand the experience issue.

This is exactly what I was going to post. Also, in regard to Gail's post; if one partner contributes the money and the other partner does the work, can't it still be a 50/50 Partnership? There are too many things that we don't KNOW about this setup.

I was just curious and certainly not suggesting any disapproval. I, personally, name mine "Final" to differentiate between the extension e-file and the return e-file.