joanmcq

New client is a retired counselor and joined a small religous order that provides care to the sick and dying. The order is worldwide, but he is pretty much it in my city. He does mostly administrative work for the order, but does some counseling, and provides support to others in the order. He is not paid, but gives much of his pension and social security to the order. Part of his home is used for storage for vestments, etc and for admin duties. When other members of the order come to town, they stay at his residence. He owns the property, not the order. Some questions: Does anyone see how a designated housing allowance could help him, or would donation to order, then housing allowance back be fishy? I've told him I need a letter specifying a dollar figure for how much he's given to the order for charitable contributions. He has sometimes taken money back to pay the mortgage, etc. If they designated a housing allowance, is it subject to SE since he is not retired from the order? Is there a way for the church to pay for part of the house, or have him deduct the part that is used for the church? He brought up OIH, but it doesn't seem appropriate. I've quizzed him as to how monks, nuns, priests handle returns when they have taken vows of poverty and live at a monastary, since this model seems to fit better than the model of a pastor/church.

I did check to see if it updated to another title, but noticed it hadn't. And then the thought promptly vacated my vacuous brain which desperately needs a vacation and I went on to something else. Next week! I can't wait. God I hope there isn't any smoke where I'm going!

I don't get any emails at all, nor do my clients. It would be nice; then I could do as you do.

I'm off to do yard work myself. Congrats to you both!

I think GW is at least one of the stupidest, ill informed presidents in history. And he has a very smart, very wiley VP pulling the strings. As well as having a plethora of other puppetmasters behind him that pretty much handpicked him for this job. But lots of people wanted to have a beer with him.

I would put my vote in at deferred comp. This is just off the top of my head and with consideration of the prior discussion. He did not actually earn any income in 2007, only sold stock, part of the basis of which, is considered compensation, but was compensation for labor done in a previous year, not 2007.

What IRS email acknowledgement? I look at the ack in my software, and that's it. Have NEVER gotten an email from the IRS.

Not for TP, but the bene's have to take out the deceased's RMD. Then they can go on their own RMDs for 2008 if the account is split. If it isn't split, it goes by the oldest beneficiary's age.

What do you mean they left germany years ago? I was in Germany last September and Walmart was there!

I'm a desert rate and learned that trick in Death Valley. It can be 120 degrees and with a breeze and a wet shirt you will actually get goosebumps from the chill. I know folks that'll put a wet bandana under their hat.

Wal-Mart is not the only reason mom & pop stores close, but what I am saying is it is not a level playing field. If Wal-Mart is given favorable tax treatment and the local hardware store isn't, then the small store has a higher overhead from the get-go and has an even harder time competing. So someone that might pay 50 cents more for an item at a store that is more convenient may not be willing to pay $1 more, and the small store goes under if they have to charge $1. Of course at this point, with gas at $5 a gallon, the Ace Hardware a mile away is a better deal than driving 7 miles to Walmart to save 50 cents on the widget. and I don't shop a Wal-Mart, period.

And in the future, most likely, water rationing. But if your knees are anything like mine, hot summers (and remember NO humidity! you are going to love the lack of humidity) are nothing compared to cold and wet. and in the dry heat, if you wear a wet shirt or hat, or even put a wet towel on your neck, the evaporative cooling effect is marvelous.

Funny it flagged 'chequer' since that is a proper word in some of the english speaking world!

What also could be reallocated is how the jobs are compensated. How does a company justify paying CEOs multi millions or billions per year? Before anyone lables me a commie pinko, realize in the rest of the western capitalist world, executive compensation does not compare to what some execs are paid here. For example, when Daimler-Benz bought Chrysler, the Chrysler execs were paid far, far more than their German counterparts. Which company is more profitable? Wal-Mart in Germany manages to pay their workers a decent wage, and all of the health, vacation & other benefits required by their government, and still remain profitable enough to want to open stores there. Why not here? Could the exec pay and perks be the difference? Also, the mom & pop stores cannot compete on the same terms as the big boxes, not only because of the economies of scale. The big boxes often get huge tax breaks for locating in a particular area, so that the community can get the short term benefit of sales tax reciepts. Wal-Mart isn't paying the sales tax, the consumer is. But Wal-Mart can undercut prices in part because of not paying property taxes or paying reduced property taxes. So in the long run the community suffers because of a short term benefit.

GM could have been at the forefront of the electric car market if they had had even a smidgeon of long term market analysis. Instead, they are going bankrupt by having bet their whole basket on 'big honkin trucks' after burying their alternate fuel vehicle. Toyota did a little anaysis and came out with the Prius, and now can't keep 'em in stock even though the credits are gone for them and they cost more than other comparable products. If management makes asinine decisions a company will go under regardless of what the workers are paid. I think both of you are a bit right. If Tom can't find workers, he is either not paying enough, or the eligible workers refuse to move to Fresno (small dig). Jainen's workers can't afford to live on the wages; either the dole pays more (so no-one except the very proud will take the job) or you have to take the job, double up & give up some of your expectations..take the bus/bike/have a kazillion roommates/eat a lot of pasta. I've been at all ends of the spectrum (except for the filthy rich end; I'm still waiting for that one!), from picking fruit in the summer during college because there wasn't any other work and starving in the process, to my currently fairly comfortable existence. And some young people are useless (as are some older ones) and some young people start Google.

The bulk of our January through March audits at TR are due to options, so I get a lot of experience. The early ones are the options not being reported at all or with the wrong sell price. Later on in the year (around september) we start getting the withholding mismatches...where the tps add the w/h on the exercise of option sheets to the w/h on the w-2. So anyone working notices at TR gets to know options very well!

My doggie wags with her whole body, so I have to in response. It does do wonders! I was gone overnight at the ethics seminar, and the dog and my old kitty are so happy I'm home...and so so am I.

What questions do you have? I've got the quickfinders right here and pretty much know options backwards and forwards anyways. Or give me a call: 802-0225 Boy I took a quick look at the fairmark link. Good Stuff!!

Did they use Quickbooks?

Thank you for this. It is very easy for me to get licensed under substantial equivelency, but I guess the firm doesn't want to spend the $100 to do so. Their lackadaisical attitude is very annoying and frustrating. You would think they would jump at the chance to get someone easily licensed to rep in Oregon (EAs need to pass the OR part of the LTC exam, and there are only two CPAs working here, moi included), but this does not appear to be the case. My direct supervisor supports me in this however. And luckily, I am taking the CalCPA ethics course tomorrow in Modesto, so I will pose the question directly, and hopefully come back with something whereby I can either get them to support me in this, or I can decline the case or just file it myself.

I did not prepare the return. The firm I work for mostly represents DIYers. If I did prepare it, (an out-of-state preparer can prepare returns if they do not advertise in oregon, work in oregon, or hold themselves out as being licensed in oregon) there would be no problem with the OR representation, since that is one of the exceptions to the requirement to be licensed. There would not be a problem if this was a federal issue either, since I can represent an Oregon resident on a federal issue. Its an OR POA, for an OR audit.

Yes. But only OR, CA & now MD have ANY requirements for licensing for tax prep. and even OR states as long as you do not advertise or solicit OR returns, and do not prepare them IN OR, a CPA is allowed to do so. So, for example, if one of my clients moves to OR, and I continue to prepare his returns, I'm ok. If I solicit an OR resident or hold myself out as being an OR preparer, I am not ok. Representation standards are different. To represent on a return you did not prepare, you have to be licensed.

The firm I work for (not a CPA firm) has assigned me to work on an OR correspondence audit. I am licensed in CA, and would be working from CA. I researched the requirements to be on Power of Attorney in OR, and I am not licensed in OR, but could file for substantial equivalency. My firm wants me to just send in the POA w/out the OR licnense number just to see if they send it back or if it goes through. Others in the firm have done so, but are EAs, not CPAs. I am having ethical doubts about the legitimacy of this, and don't think I can 1) hold myself out as a CPA w/o an oregon license (although its not clear if that is the case if I am not physically present in OR) & 2) if I don't put CPA on the POA, that knowing I am not licensed in OR is enough to prevent me from ethically submitting a request to be a representative knowing that I don't qualify. Any thoughts from either the OR or CA sides, or just in general?

That's close to the CAMICO letter, but not exact. The CAMICO one doesn't have the bit about the Sch C and SE or the last disclaimer paragraghs. This is the important bit "We prepared the income tax returns noted above based on the documentation and other information provided to us by our client. We did not audit, review, or otherwise verify the accuracy of such documentation or information at any time, and we have not and do not express an opinion or give any other form of assurances regarding the same." But I just don't sign one. If they want a stated income loan they can buy a letter from a 'CPA' willing to sign one.

Well, if he is having so much fun, I can imagine him not thinking much about work. I don't when I'm on vacation!