rfassett

You want the easiest, quickest way? Give the client $40 and send him over to the ex-employer to get his W-2. And then add $50 to your bill for your troubles. The others suggests are valid, but you asked for the most expeditious route.

No depletion. Your thinking is correct. That is most likely a 1040 other income thing.

Well, we have had so much else to deal with this tax season - late passage of tax law, delayed form creation and updates, rationed efiling, family members passing, umpteen feet of snow to shovel, crankly clients smelling blood from the extreme stress this season has created and going for the jugular, computer issues that won't quit - what's one more speed bump on the road? But with all due respect, post-filing season would also be my vote. We do so much appreciate all that you do - THANKS!!!

Ray - I feel your pain. My rear-end was dragging so far behind me this morning I had to turn around and yell at it to keep up. Also found myself talking to my feet this morning trying to get one to put itself in front of the other and so on. And I am NOT EVEN joking.

jainen made be look because his comment made me think of a nuance in this that I knew was there but could not recall. It does not matter if the points are paid by the buyer OR the seller, the buyer is entitled to the deduction irrespective of which party pays. So even though there is a requirement that there be enough cash at closing to pay them, it does not have to be the buyer's cash.

Your humililty impresses me. Can I have some of that? Anyway, if the points are broken out on the 1098, that is probably all you will get. In the truest sense, points are what the borrower is paying to "buy down" the interest rate. They, the points, therefore have been determined to be prepaid interest. That is what makes them deductible. They are not very often broken down separately on the hud. Most of what you are looking for on a homeowner hud is interest expense and real estate taxes. The rest is just filler.

Thanks Margaret. I have reviewed the instructions and other sources and they all state that the home must become your primary residence. Let me state unequivicably that I am in total agreement with you at the moment. But playing the devil's advocate for a moment - none of my reading indicated a time frame in which the new home had to become the primary residence. The only time reference I found was the 36 month window AFTER occupation. (As an aside, I can still hear one of my tax instructors saying "if you have to ask how long, you probably already have the answer".) Anyway, I just wanted to make sure there was nothing out there that I am missing before I tell the client that the 2009 return will need amended and the credit paid back. Thanks again.

With all of the posts I have seen everywhere I am certain this has probably been addressed somewhere sometime. I apologize for bringing it up again. Thanks for any insight you can offer. Facts: New client last year - husband and wife - qualified for the Long Time Homeowner credit. New home purchased in a town several miles away with the intention of moving then. No intention to sell old house - then or now. Very shortly after new home purchased, wife's mother becomes ill and eventually passes away two weeks ago. Move to new residence never happened because of mother's illness. Wife drops off 2010 tax info yesterday and says that the move to the new home is "on hold" because she "can not imagine" giving up her job in this economic environment knowing that getting a job in the new location is highly improbable. When I inquired what was being done with the new home, she said their adult single daughter is living in it and maintaining it. It is not a rental situation. So how do I proceed? Is this a credit re-capture? If so, amend 2009? Or pick it up on 2010? Or is there some way around the re-capture that I am missing? This client and I will have a meeting in the next day or so. My practice has been built on integrity and I have stated over and over to my client's that although I will do my best to minimize their tax liability I will not cross the line for or with them. The wife suggested yesterday that we just put the new home address on the return - as if that would make all of her problems go away. Not on my watch. We will do the right thing or they will go elsewhere. Again, thanks for your comments.

Thanks! It is a DPOA, and she has reached incompetency levels. I like your suggestion of legal counsel though. The deceased husband, although old enough to nearly be my grandfather, was a friend of mine who had quite the story including being shot down (he was a fighter pilot) and being a POW and other very interesting things. He started a business that he ran very successfully for 50 years, was married to the same woman until she passed ten or so years ago, and has great children that have worked in the business and will now be able to continue running it successfully. Second wife is a great person, but HER children, with the exception of the son with the POA, are "money grabbers". I have been able to run interference between these two camps pretty successfully. But I agree, it may be time to get my own counsel to be sure I don't get caught in the cross fire. Thanks again. Oh, and in case anyone would think that they would like to be a POA for someone (and this can be said of an executor of an estate also), I have seen this son with the POA age about ten years in the last twelve months.

Cut through the proverbial crap and get back to the facts. Do the support calculations again. And do what's right. Even if Grandma does come up with additional income sufficient to claim the children, my guess is if she did not keep track of income she probably did not keep track of expenses either. So all of her income will be subject to SE tax and that will eat up a good chunck of her EIC. Anyway, I would start the next appointment as if it was new. Get ALL the facts and then determine the proper required filings and proceed from there. Good Luck!

Come on SunTaxMan, I don't want to think that hard. My brain is already hurting today. I may have not made myself clear, though. Rental of farmland and facilities that is based on a share of crops or livestock produced by a tenant is reported on Form 4835.

I know this has had to come up before, but it is the first time for me. Husband passed away in Feb 2010. Wife signs 2009 return as surviving spouse. Wife's health begins to fail and by the time the 2010 return is complete, she is in nursing home and son has POA. Any issues with son as POA signing the return as surviving spouse. There is a $3,600 refund, if that matters.

4835 is only used when the landlord is sharing in the production.

Very cute!! But I thought we were already friends. And 1.37 is exactly how I am going to look at 4:31 pm on April 15th.

I agree with Lion - but only after I realized what she was saying. I could not think for the life of me where a general ledger (G/L) came into this mix nor why you would want to send it to the IRS. I REALLY need a break.

Why not? Cash basis taxpayer takes deduction in year the check is written. Does the fact that the liablity accrued two or three years ago taint the answer? I don't think so.

No - only the amounts for which he received a tax benefit via itemizing deductions. In your case, just the 2009. And again, only to the extent that he received a tax benefit for them in the prior year.

Buick is showing a commercial for one of their cars that says a person has 3,000 thoughts per day. I don't think they polled our industry. I think I had that many thoughts by 10:00 this morning.

Agreed, jainen, but in both of the examples you cite the tax is not being paid. The question was, can taxes paid in the current year for the prior year's liability be deducted? In other words, if I write a check to pay my state tax in April of this year to pay my 2010 state taxes, can that payment be included in itemized deductions on the 2011 return. The answer to that question is as I stated above.

Yes - it is always deductible. Sometimes it just gets lumped into the standard deduction. Since your client is most likely a cash basis taxpayer, he will take the deduction in the year in which it was paid. As to why you are brain dead on this - I do not know. The more troubling question is - why am I not?

It is really a facts and circumstances test. I tell my clients that if you look like a business, act like a business, smell like a business, etc, then there is nothing in the code that dissallows a loss year after year. All that is required is that there must be a "profit motive". From a practical perspective, I continue to tell them, you better be prepared to explain WHY you continue operating a "loss" business and HOW you are buying your groceries and paying your rent.

I created one last evening and noticed the same thing. I transmitted it and just now pulled down the ack and both the fed and the state, neither of which had an assigned dcn, are showing as accepted.

Not kidding even a little bit. In my nature of "less professionalism" I prepare a solid return EVERY year. "They" (the same as referenced before) are more than welcome to look at prior year returns. I do believe you are making this sound more serious than it is. Do you REALLY think an agent would pick up my client's return just because of that statement? I tell my clients that I prepare all returns in accordance with the Internal Revenue Code and the regulations promulgated therefore. Well, not quite like that. I tell them that I will prepare their return in a manner that most benefits them in accordance with the law. Whats more, I sign every one of the returns that I prepare with a statement that the return that I have prepared is true and accurate blah blah blah. And lest you accuse me of talking out of both sides of my mouth. You and I both know that the instructions are not law. So please don't go there.

I think we all know who "they" refers to. And I will stand by my comment. If they want to play Stupid... All they will have to do is refer to the info we have already provided in the prior year return(s). I have enough to do this time of year without having to be supply redundant information. And if that makes me less professional, as you suggest, then so be it. Call me "less professional".

Well, alas, my wife surprised me. Instead of soup, it was an angus burger (corn fed) on a bun. Yum yum. I admire you folks that can have a beer at lunch. As fatigued as I am, half a beer would put me on the floor right under the desk for a nice siesta. Needless to say, that would not be very productive.