Catherine

I send 'em all to the IRS site for Coronavirus updates, https://www.irs.gov/coronavirus-tax-relief-and-economic-impact-payments and then the state unemployment board. Yes, we're telling people ALL The time (1) the rules are changing weekly, and (2) we don't know. But we're also asking people to make note of any payment they get, in case we need to know next year.

Guidelines just released - see Q. 41 on this IRS page: IRS Economic Impact Payment Information Center

It's also possible that she was paid in cash, but it was all properly reported and a W-2 issued. Then she'd be eligible with no issues. My first job ever, I got a pay envelope every week, cash inside, and a stamped outside with all the withheld taxes listed. LOL; that was a LONG time ago! $71.01 per week for 40 hours, and I lived on it AND saved for school.

non-glossy tape. lots of practice sewing tiny things carefully, so I can line the bits up really well. but it does NOT work when there are holes in the check.

I have successfully scanned and electronically deposited torn checks. Using non-glossy tape is important, and lining it up well also.

While that would certainly be fastest and easiest, the response that would do the kid more good in her life would be a good spanking, along with some mission work in a seriously poor area, to learn how good she really has it.

I just love that your example envelope has been opened and the check removed!

Or, like the sign my younger daughter got me for my desk: "I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you."

I wouldn't touch this one without a good long chat with my E&O people, for sure.

NOT beneficiaries; rather trustees with a fiduciary duty! I am *not* wedded to the idea that it definitely has to be 2019, or 2016 - or 1986, for that matter. What I AM saying is that there was a failure of FIDUCIARY DUTY on the part of ONE of the trustees refusing to allow a bank account to be opened, and that fact makes this a NASTY tangle, with legal implications for BOTH trustees, for failure to do their fiduciary duty. If it were me involved, I'd want those sorted out BEFORE I picked any year out of all those involved. Look: say they go back and use 2016. Then the actual beneficiary sues the trustees for not disbursing the funds then. YOU want to be involved in that mess, as trustee? Or as tax pro who gets dragged in willy-nilly? Or use 2019; possible same lawsuit except it's over delay in accepting payment, instead of delay in disbursement. Another nasty mess for trustees and tax pro. THOSE are the crucial issues that I see. I kinda don't care what year gets used (because yes, penalties can be waived, especially if there's a good paper trail of the obfuscations and obstacles on the part of the PITA trustee). What I would not want, as trustee or as tax pro, is to leave myself open to being sued by the beneficiary for not handing over, in 2016, funds that could not be legally accepted until 2019.

I'd call support on that one; I have never seen it so I haven't a clue.

If you have a record of that check being re-negotiated multiple times, with the final one being the one that was able to be cashed, I still think that, based on LEGAL status, you did not have receipt until the final check. Talk it over with the lawyer involved, as well as the trustee. There are good arguments to be made on all sides - but don't discount the possibility of action against the trustee(s) by beneficiaries, if receipt is claimed in 2016 but no distribution was made until 2019, contrary to the direct instructions of the trust.

Only in trying to understand it all NOW. It's a big, complex program, with little gotchas and glitches scattered throughout. I am hoping that by next year's filing season they have the basic issues worked out. Until then, Magic 8-Ball keeps saying, "Answer hazy; Ask again later!"

Wasn't on "internal bickering" but lack of a LEGAL option for taking the payment. Without a bank account, and with a trustee not agreeing to open one, there was no legal way to accept the payment. I'd want to know what the lawyer was doing, and why situs and more wasn't settled, and if there is a case for the recalcitrant trustee being charged with acting outside of fiduciary interests. Claiming income in 2016, but NOT distributing it, as the trust required, opens up a possible action against both trustees.

I'd love for Drake to make some changes to their reports. Font size is certainly one! Customization is another; I've managed to wrangle some specialized reports, and tried to save/memorize them, but durned if I can *ever* find them again later. Grrr!

Yikes, you DO have a nice conundrum here - good luck! Last first: situs likely has nothing to do with where either of the trustees live; rather, the situs will be the state where the decedent lived and had the trust written up in. However, rules can vary between states so you'll likely need to check with both NY (generally nasty; that state wants tax on everything - I hear air is on the docket for next year [only half kidding]) and MO about their rules. It sounds like a complex trust, and certainly acts that way. "Terminate on distribution" is all well and good except for the long time between the triggering event and the resolution, so circumstances have forced it. I would think that you have an excellent case to make that the trust did *not* actually get "constructive receipt" in 2016, because it had no way to take possession of the funds (a piece of paper that was not legally negotiable is, to my mind, a block to constructive receipt). However, you should be ready to support that with the paper/email/whatever trail of no bank account, lawyers involved, trustee acting against interests of trust by refusing to allow the bank account, probable re-issuance of check (maybe multiple times) since those are usually only good for 90 to 180 days, etc. So what I would do (and this is without extensive - or really any - research) is prepare $0 returns for 2016, 17, 18, and the real receipt and distribution for 2019. If you are an NATP member, this might be a real good use of their "one research question free per year" service.

Good riddance! We've been swamped with all manner of calls and emails. Mostly about the loan/business stuff, but also about stimulus payments. Out-of-country (US citizen) clients too. ("Am I eligible?" Magic 8-Ball says "Answer hazy - ask again later" aka I dunno!) FORMER clients are calling. People wanting to know why they didn't get the payment for the new baby (born in Jan, not even on the not-yet-filed 2019 return). I've been sending them all to the IRS web page.

I don't see any cause for depreciation. The timeshare isn't really ownership of the building asset, rather it's reserved time to USE that asset.

Ah but you can get 90% or more of the joy by just *thinking* about it. Indulge those fantasies for a couple of minutes, then shelve it and move on.

It all got straightened out.

Nope; they each qualify.

What happened to the rules about rentals that lasted fewer than 10 days? Do those not apply to a timeshare? Or did they go poof while I wasn't looking?

Ooh; that's a tactic I did not think of. He had his broker at the investment firm send me (yet another) copy of the consolidated 1099. Maybe they have the trust documents. I'll email the lady and ask her.

Listed as zero BUT the value of the inventory, as sold to the new owner, goes on Form 4797.

The rent-back has been severely limited for several years now. We no longer recommend the self-rental scheme. No, I don't have a cite handy.