Medlin Software, Dennis

<rant> I have no connection with ATX, nor do I use it. ATX saying UAC and admin access does not bother me in the least. Why? UAC and access levels are a way for MS to protect MS (reduce calls to MS). It does nothing to protect the person sitting at the keyboard from doing something stupid. We are talking about someone with permission to handle personal information and tax returns of others. if the same person cannot be trusted to not do something stupid on the computer, there is a bigger issue than using UAC and access levels... UAC does exactly zero to prevent stupid actions. The UAC box allows the UAC warning to be bypassed. If were real protection, it would not have just a button to bypass the warning. Access levels, if needed, say you do not trust the person at the keyboard, so why let them at it in the first place? <rant>

The video settings, card, and memory (shared or not), will affect the perceived speed when using your computer. As I am not an ATX user, I am not sure how they update the display, but moving to a new field probably involves calculations, error checking, updating other fields, and saving data to your drive. The drive is the next slowest item, magnified if the software is network or multi user capable, and magnified again if you are actually using network or multi user capabilities. In other words, Ram may increase load and unload speed, and in some case, operation speed, but the video and drive capabilities have more affect on operation speed.

Medlin does not import data from any other program. We have no control over what the other program sends, so each bit of information would have to be manually audited and corrected, which works out to be slower than typing whatever is needed.

In Medlin, when printing a DE88, it is a fill in the blank deal. We do not fill or prefill any of the values. The DE9 and DE9C are liability forms only, and are filled using the paycheck data, and via input boxes to confirm the CA UI rate for the business, and if needed, to confirm exemption from CA ETT.

Hidden ATX files "smells funny". A hidden program file (exe, dll, etc) should still open. Hidden should not cause a problem there. A hidden file "may" cause a problem if it is something which might be changed.

Tom, I see both sides, both as user (programming tools I depend on) and as vendor (software I create). Nothing can stay the same, much is out of my control, and I acknowledge and embrace that I can't make software which will please all. No one can do those things for me either...

Nice to hear I did not do somethign to mess it up for you!

Can of worms for me. I admit, I chuckled at the message. I also cringed. I cringe when someone contacts me for help and assumes I do not want to, assumes they could not have made a mistake, or worse yet, gets irate when the honest answer is not one they want to hear. I have to say "no" to some requests (for various reasons) and the number of times I get told "but I am the customer (or potential customer), you have to do what I ask" is stunning. For today's example, getting "ripped" by a caller who wanted me to license them our software, because they were tired of paying a payroll service. I said "no" because they had no payroll experience or training, and were simply not qualified to do their own payroll. (Payroll software does not make a payroll processor any more than tax software makes one a tax preparer.) I suppose I am simply saying while the message is funny, it can be written with the participants reversed, and still not be true in the vast majority of the cases.

Barosser, I am curious. Were the "hidden" files system (Windows) files, software (ATX) files, or your (data) files? The hidden attrib might be an issue on opening of data files, or if the software needed to update some of the software files. With current versions of Windows, only MS is supposed to alter system files. This came up for me for the first time, last week. One of our customers had "somehow" set their data files to hidden. We do not set files to hidden, nor were expecting it to be hidden. The "somehow" could have been direct fiddling with the file properties, some sort of computer or folder level fiddling, or any number of other possibilities. Since we will never really know how it happened, the net result is another line of code to undo what someone incorrectly did on their own... or some other program/process did to files it had no business messing with. The problems can occur if permissions, ownership, and other security settings are unexpected to the software.

Still a current issue (to me). When I get a potential new customer who thinks obtaining software will enable them to become a payroll processor, I (try to) politely turn them down. No software teaches anyone to become a payroll processor, or tax preparer. All need the underlying knowledge/experience to know when something is simply not right. The software developer is not signing the forms... My first computer was a Panasonic "portable" which weighed 20+ lbs. Fancy one at that as it had two floppy (720k) drives and a 10meg hard drive. It was a gift from a family member who was a county planner. I had a feeling I would end up in some sort of computer related work when I first went to visit my mom at her workplace. She was then a keypuncher for Southern Pacific, and took her cards into a huge room with a "computer" in it. It was in 1966 IIRC.

I am answering many "how do I calculate 2013 paychecks" questions. The sad part is there is no official method for 2013 federal withholding published by the treasury department / IRS. Some might say since there is no calculations available, there is no withholding. One government employee was quoted by the APA as saying something similar to it would not be inconsistent to use 2012 calculations. Since the T Dept has authority to issue calculations (as it did before the agreement was made last year) and has not, it could be the T Dept was asked to not do or say anything official. It is tough to think otherwise as their job, in this case, "IS" to issue instructions to make sure enough is withheld...

"Well - this is a single PC installation (not server)." Something to keep in mind is every recent version of Windows is really a network / multi user operating system. Whether or not you use your computer as a stand alone does not matter, software vendors have to consider every installation as potentially networked and/or multi user.

Logmein. Have not tried printing, but I believe it is included.

Agree on the penalty/interest. Some might say it is smart money (commodity) management by your clients to not be in a rush to pay you when there is no penalty. Money has a cost, and you are loaning it to them free. While I do not have any receivables in my current line of work, way back when, I did. My cost to carry receivables had to be more than my cost of money (getting a loan), plus a profit on my time to handle the receivables, plus a factor to account for noncollectable items. As long as I could borrow for less than what I was charging, and I accounted for a certain amount of noncollectable, I was making a profit both on my work and my loan.

I had 720k floppies for Win 3.1, not the fancy 1.44's. Sometimes I wish we had to learn to use our computers... There is a distinct trade off between hiding the operation from the user and the power of knowing what is happening. I suppose a fair comparison is becoming a preparer versus paying for some preparation software!

Win 8 does not take more "computer" to run than Win 7. Some units on the shelf with Win 8 are the exact same thing which was available a few months ago with Win 7. Win 8 works fine without touchscreen. (While touch can be useful, those inputting numbers and letters will likely be forever in need of keyboard entry, which MS is well aware of.) There is a way to simulate a fairly familiar desktop with Win 8, instead of the "tiles". Unless an application was doing something it probably should not have been doing, anything which worked with Win 7 (and probably Vista and XP) will work with Win 8. I still use dbase III (circa 1986) on a daily basis - which works fine with every flavor of Win so far. Despite thoughts (and some good reasoning) of doing so, MS is not likely to introduce a desktop OS which breaks existing applications. Application developers should not use OS dependent code (easy to do). While it would be nice sometimes to use some code, trick, or function available in one particular OS, supporting different versions for different OS releases is expensive and makes little sense. Jack is correct and gives sage advice. No reason to add more unknowns right before anyone's busy time. On the other hand, I would add "new" is a relative term. MS has been making their "new" items available for public trial months before release, which is always after they have tested it fairly well in a closed beta test. A "new" OS has been used plenty before official release, and does not worry me. What do I use most? Vista for daily work as there is nothing I need from a new computer, and it takes time (read costs money) to "move" into a newer computer. Have others with XP, 7, and 8 for non work use, and for testing. I actually just threw away my set of Win 3.1 install floppies last Friday...

Speaking in my case only... A foster child is not a family member (not a dependent student). The payment is not income to me, since I do not claim the child(ren) as dependents. (Hard to meet the means test since the county provides a stipend, and the biggie, medical coverage.) I could see some instances where the payment could be considered income to the child, but even if it was, being an independent student, any stipend (if construed as income for the child) is not likely to "hurt" for financial aid.

It a proper HA, it is not part of payroll reporting, such as on a 941. It is certainly an expense, but probably best kept separate from PR to avoid any issues of it getting mixed in with PR reporting. (IMO Ideally HA is kept completely out of PR. Paid through AP, separate statement at the end of year - not added to Box 14 of W-2, all filed nicely with the annual authorization from the church showing the amount.)

So much more I want to write, but without more from the OP, there is no point speculating. Is there a valid contactor license in place? If not, the person should be reported for contracting without, and the client should promise not to make the same mistake twice. Does the client want to fight, with the understanding they may very well lose? Does the client realize they may end up paying both the EE and ER taxes as it sounds as if the worker is less than flush? Penalties could be added as well. Has the client considered the relatively fixed costs of change to EE, versus the open ended costs of trying to prove IC (and may lose and have to pay the EE and ER costs anyway)? Added: My earlier post of the VA code definition of a contractor has no provision for a contractor being paid by the hour...

When not abundantly clear it is/was an IC relationship, it is usually because it was not. Points towards employee: $15 an hour, paid on a regular cycle, as reported by the person doing the work (not by the job). The pay rate itself. Points towards IC: Nothing I see in OP would lead me to make the IC argument. For me, I would take my medicine of trying to get by on the cheap. I would also report the person to the state licensing board for trying to pass themselves off as a contractor. (My bolding) The Virginia Code defines “contractor” as follows: [A]ny person, that for a fixed price, commission, fee, or percentage undertakes to bid upon, or accepts, or offers to accept, orders or contracts for performing, managing or superintending in whole or in part, the construction, removal, repair or improvement of any building or structure permanently annexed to real property owned, controlled, or leased by him or another person or any other improvements to such real property.

CA has posted new withholding calculations for the remainder of 2012 as a result of Prop. 30 passing. http://www.edd.ca.go...Withholding.htm

Can;t answer your question, but your last line caught me. "All" of my "hobbies" depreciate my bank account... :P

Soft answer... meant to get you thinking, not as advice, and I did not really think on it too long so I reserve the right to be wrong . Must be shown as income - Insurance paid directly by the S corp will need to be reported as wages somewhere, H, W, or some combination. Wether or not it is deductible: From the IRS site: "A 2-percent shareholder-employee is eligible for an Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) deduction for amounts paid during the year for medical care premiums if the medical care coverage is established by the S corporation and the shareholder meets the other self-employed medical insurance deduction requirements. If, however, the shareholder or the shareholder’s spouse is eligible to participate in any subsidized health care plan then the shareholder is not entitled to the AGI deduction." Your message does not give enough information to answer "If, however, the shareholder or the shareholder’s spouse is eligible to participate in any subsidized health care plan then the shareholder is not entitled to the AGI deduction". --- If not deductible, I would not have the corp make direct payment. W's pay should be increased the same amount (some might gross it up to keep net pay the same). If not deductible, there will be some underwithholding if the corp pays directly... Unless the H were to start to get regular pay (reasonable compensation, at least minimum wage at the required minimum frequency for your state) I would not allocate it to the H via a single paycheck or W-2 only.

One item to add, when there is income/profit, make sure to meet the minimum pay frequency requirements for the state (if any). An owner/employee still has to be treated like any other employee. For example, in CA, employees (owner or not), with a few exceptions, must be paid at least twice a month. I hear fairly often from folks who are owner/employees paying themselves once a year, once a quarter, or something else not allowed by their state.

I did not see the second state in your messages. Whether or not the employee is subject to non-MD taxes is based on the other state's rules and/or any agreement between the involved states. It could be the employer is ignoring their payroll responsibilities, is unaware of their responsibilities, or possibly because the employer is actually handling it correctly. In my state (CA) wages earned here are subject to income tax here, even if earned by a non-resident, and even if the employer did not withhold and remit withholding to CA. Form is 540NR Local taxes could certainly be a mess... Personally, I would not trust the employer and would handle my taxes to the best of my ability, including filing in states other than those my employer reported to if needed. There could be repercussions with the employer as the W2 is not likely properly prepared...