BulldogTom

Thanks. Patrick left a message for him at his office.

I got an e-mail from my "account manager". Here is the transcript of our exchange. I think this means that renewing will get all of us a $995 price for Max. At least that is their opening offer. Seems like a pretty good deal. Mr. Carlson, What I can tell you is that you can expect a far better program for 2013 filings versus what we had for you in the 2012 season. It does not matter when you place your order, I have your ATX MAX package priced at $995, instead of the retail $1249 minus 10%. Also, I’ve added an additional $49 discount to that as well. Your final price, with processing and sales tax included, is $1,101.28. Simply give me a call when you are ready to order. Thank you for all of the years of using ATX and, hopefully, the opportunity for ATX to regain your trust next season. Have a great Thursday! Will Van Kleef Account Manager CCH Small Firm Services, a Wolters Kluwer business 225 Chastain Meadows Court NW Suite 200 Kennesaw, GA 30144 (PH) 1-800-495-4626 ext. 1223 [email protected] From: Thomas R. Carlson, EA [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, September 27, 2013 10:13 PM To: Will Van Kleef Subject: RE: Hello from your ATX Acct Mgr What are you offering for a discount to keep me after that disaster of a software package you unloaded on us last year? And if you come back with 10% if I sign up early, I am going to be very insulted. I have been a client since 2001. Lets see how much you value me. Thomas R. Carlson, MST, EA

Cool like that man! I can't even imagine when I will hear the same thing from my sons. They are too wrapped up in calculus and physics and engineering and SAT's and scholarships and applications for scholarships and college applications. Hopefully when they finish school they will notice that female companionship is pretty cool. Tom Hollister, CA

Catherine, Do you know a David Morales? He is supposed to do the interview with my son. Patrick has e-mailed him twice but not gotten a response for a scheduled date for the interview. MIT has lots of grads, and not really expecting that you would know one from the West Coast, but I just thought I would ask. Thanks Tom

Wow, did not know you could block people that you don't want to read or even see. What a great feature. Thanks Eric. This is the coolest thing since sliced bread. Tom Hollister, CA

A dark day in the history of this country.

Sure, send it along. It can't hurt. Patrick is currently waiting for his interview to be scheduled. He is on pins and needles because the interviewer has not gotten back to him yet. Still keeping our fingers crossed. Step one, get him accepted. Step two, find the money. Not sure which one will be harder to accomplish. Thanks for the kind words.

Catherine, You and I have spoken several times about my son's desire to attend MIT. Attached is the recommendation letter he recieved from his intership at NASA this past summer. Yes, I am bragging, isn't that what parents are supposed to do. Ignore the date, he corrected it to 2013 on a later e-mail. Tom Recommendation Patrick Carlson.pdf

I would like to see them. [email protected]

Actually, there is a tax case of a professional bowler who won in Tax Court by closing her business. Don't know the name, but the lady traveled all over the south living in hotels and entering tournaments. She went to different tours and locations for about 7 years. Never made a profit and had huge sch C losses. The IRS audits and disallows as a hobby. Tax court disagreed. The books were immaculent, and the taxpayer had a business plan. The 2 major deciding factors for the court was that the taxpayer tried several different methods to earn a profit, and that when they didn't work, SHE CLOSED THE BUSINESS.

Well, the client went back to the offices of the financial advisor, asked why she had not gotten her confirmation, stood in front of him while he got her on a conference call to the main office, and told her not to worry, everything was fine and they would take care of it. A week later, she called back, he wouldn't take her call. A week later, he would not take her call. A week later, she called the main office and they never heard of her. Two days later the check was cut and sent to her. They never asked for anything else after she initially signed up. I see in the letter they say their are outstanding requirements on the application and so are returning the money. However, it was a direct trustee to trustee transfer when done. She never got the money until they sent it back to her. What do you think. They are covering their rear ends because the broker screwed up. Or do you think my client somehow did something wrong and it was her fault? She tells me she stood in his office and they never asked for anything else. Just told her it would all work out. Tom Hollister, CA

Jainen, I have a client who left her job and requested a rollover of her retirement plan. The old company made the transfer to the new financial institution, but the new institution did not create the account nor deposit the money on her behalf. They sent her a check after the 60 days had expired. Reading Rev Proc. 2003-16 it looks like the automatic approval of the waiver of the 60 day rule is applicable. How do I file the return to show that the rev proc applies. In the old days, I would have hand written "REV PROC 2003-16" on the top of the form and mailed that sucker in. How do we go about it in the electronic age. Thanks for your help. It might help if I read the instructions, but I haven't been chewed out by you in a while so I thought I would ask. Really, I just want to know if the Rev Proc is still in effect. Thanks. Tom Hollister, CA

HV Ken, There is a difference between a bond and retentions. I am in CA and not CT, but I would guess the general rules are the same. BTW - my day job is controller for a construction company, General Contractor. Retentions should be addressed in the contract with the General. Look at that and see if there is language relating to retentions and when they will be released. Our contract with our subs says upon payment by the owner, we will pay within 7 days. Different contracts have different language. If the general has been paid the retentions, but not paid his subs, the sub can file a lien on the property. The owner will then be notified that the general has not paid all the subs and probably contact the general to get the payments made. Send me a PM on the side and we can go into much more depth if you want. I will give you my phone number if you want to talk about the subject. Tom Hollister, CA

If you will confine that crazy woman "Taxed" to that forum only, I am all for it. Sorry for posting after saying I wouldn't for a while, but any chance to put that woman out of the mainstream forum and into a political fantasy land is something I have to advocate for. Back to my hibernation. Maybe will see you all in January. Tom Hollister, CA

I wonder what changed in the last couple of months to bring up these issues? HMMMMMMM......just thinking here. Any new members who have come on in this time frame? HHHHMMMMMM..... let me think.....anyone at all who was not here 3-4 months ago who now posts on every post...... HMMMMMMMM.... let me think......someone who is so very political that the rules need to be changed after 6 years..... HMMMMMM....let me think....who could it be..... (in the voice of dana carvey as the church lady on SNL)..... COULD IT BE........SATAN.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?????????????????????????????? Close...but we all know who came on the board a few months ago and started all this crap........hmmmmmmmm...who could it be........ I hope it all works out for you. Let the dust settle and let the newbies run the threads. Nothing important being said anyway, and nothing I can offer that is not offensive anyway. Just being a red blooded, true American makes me the scourge of America to some people around here. No need to stand up to anyone who wants to show that they know everything by posting on every thread, and inserting political and racial comments........hmmmmmm......who does that around here in the last few months? HMMMMMM....I think I will retire from this board for a while. KC, please give me your e-mail.....I will miss you more than you know. Jainen, I love you man. Catherine, hope to see you in Boston next year when I drop my kid off. Jack in OH and Old Jack, you are good people, and I learn a lot from you. My brother Eli, hope to see you in Dallas. Eric, you are a good dude. Thanks for putting up this board. Too bad the DAL's have run it down. I can get this on the other board, so that is where I will go for a while. Peace out.

WTF.....do you ever really read anything. Or do you just like reading what you type. You really amaze me with your __________. The whole point of the post was that those lazy, unionized, government employee liberals who are spending so much time harassing honest, hard working tea party conservatives should be spending more time reading the tax law they are supposed to administer. Just another example of social experimentation in government gone horribly wrong. Taxed, do you really have to respond to every post on the board. Ever heard the phrase "less is more". And in your case particularly, a lot less is a lot more. Tom Hollister, CA

Non-recourse loans will not generate COD income. However, make certain that they have not refinanced, because, generally, only initial purchase contracts are non-recourse. Tom Hollister, CA

I would love to see the pictures, but I don't click on links from unknown sources, even if you are promoting them. Post one of them on the thread so I can see what the hell you all are talking about. Tom Hollister, CA

Got it today. I guess my e-mail telling them I was not a member of the Tea Party did the trick. Tom Hollister, CA

Ah, but you are wrong. I would not have a say in how the money is spent at some national office that doesn't give a rats @$$ about what I think. And right now I have absolute say over how they spend my money, they don't spend a dime of it. Tom Hollister, CA

Not unless the partnership agreement says so. Like if the agreement says the profits and losses are based on percentage of capital in the ps at the end of the year. It all comes down to what the agreement says. Tom Hollister, CA

I have a problem with NAEA and any of the EA societies. While I think they are good for the EA community, they don't promote the designation. I bet 1 in 10 Americans know what an EA is. I bet 10 in 10 Americans think that a CPA is always more knowledgeable about tax law. When I see real advertising and improvement in the perception of the EA designation, I will join. But the only way to protest the lack of community education is to vote with my lack of membership. Tom Hollister, CA

Not a member. I guess I will just pester them the old fashioned way, every day a call and an e-mail and cc my congressman. Tom Hollister, CA

How many of those were really unregistered preparers using TT over and over again? Tom Hollister, CA

Think about it. How about if one of your clients said "I have a kid that I can't use on my tax return, can I let my business partner put my kid on his tax return?". It is the same concept. The partnership agreement spells out the flow of profits and losses to the partners. You can't just change it because it would work out better tax wise for the partners. However, if the partners wanted to revisit the partnership return and for some type of valuable consideration sell a part of the partnership to another partner so that in future years he can take advantage of the percieved benefits of more ownership, then they can do that. But the partnership agreement is the rule for how profits and losses are allocated to the partners. Tom Hollister, CA