OldJack

I agree with JohnH. Damn John, you were in the military too many years!

What do you mean NOT under the restrictions of Circular 230. I am a CPA and the last I knew Circular 230 applied to my practice with the IRS. BTW, I prepared my first 1040 tax return in 1965, long before Circular 230, and I have been preparing tax returns ever since.

Incompetent and unlicensed tax preparers were not my problem until the IRS decided to license/control all preparers and have penalties for everything. The problem appears to be with the franchised tax services so why does the IRS cause small professional tax preparers so much headache?

I doubt that your client can take lease payment deductions as such. However, depending upon the paperwork, he may have a capital lease that is considered as a financial arrangement and therefore the vehicle is considered and booked the same as a purchase with all normal deductions allowed. Factors indicating a capital lease are spelled out in Rev. Proc. 2001-28. This subject is summarized in the Quickfinder Depreciation Handbook. Good luck.

So what do you tell your client when they call you wanting copies of the last 3 years tax returns to give to the bank for a loan?

Joan, I was not whining about the fee. I just want to be independent and represent my clients without being considered a licensed agent for the IRS. If the client claims a deduction in a gray area of the tax law and it has been disallowed by the IRS who do you represent? Do all the new requirements not bother you?

Yes, I am a CPA and have also paid all those fees and everyone should have to do the same. But, you are missing the point of what has happened. Its "control stupid"! In the past it has been state license and now it is federal license and state license. State license did not dictate our relationship between the client and the IRS. Its now the federal government controlling our profession rather than the state. You might as well drop your CPA license and save the cost.

Maybe the IRS is waiting to see how the election turns out on Nov 2nd?

True...but before Obama, CPA's were licensed/controlled by the state and "represented our clients" before the IRS. Face it, like it or not, we are now licensed/controlled by the IRS and now "represent the IRS". Your new title will soon be "Tax Collector" (not me as I will retire). This is our fault for voting the way we have and allowing our professional organizations to ignore are business interest. Its called shooting yourself in the foot!

If they ever think of it they will probably want us to sign tax returns with a bloody fingerprint! We can't really complain about it though as by our silence we all let them get away with telling us what to do.

Big democrat brother is definitely watching, quote from the IRS PTIN letter: >>You indicated on your application that you're currently in compliance with your federal tax obligations. To ensure that you maintain compliance in the future, the IRS will conduct periodic tax compliance checks. The IRS may also conduct a background check, and you may need to provide fingerprints. Having a felony conviction on your record could affect your status as a tax practitioner as well as your ability to prepare tax returns. For more information, see Treasury Department Circular 230 § 10.51. << Tax Preparers are no longer just helpers for the IRS.

And... where were our professional organizations that are supposed to be looking out for our interest? Its about time we quit paying dues! Did anyone hear them object? Am I the only one that is tired of working for the IRS without pay?

Well... in my opinion the IRS and our government is out of control with nothing but harrassment of our profession and business owners. If the government had its way they would probably be a pee tax! I say throw them all out of a job!!!

Well... I gave the vultures my hard earned $$$ and all I got was a number that I really did not want. Where is the T-party when you need them? :angry:

So what is the penalty if you prepare and sign a 2010 tax return without a PTIN?

Sorry... duplicate post.

>>and then the K as Interest income<< I think Taxd Out has the right idea but it is an interest expense on the 1065 and does not show up as income on any K1. The LLC member gets a 1099-Int for his interest income the same as if it was a non-member that has loaned money to the business. I agree it is not guaranteed payments.

Yes, your post indicates you are lost. Remember this is a corporation and not a partnership even though many partnership rules apply on determining taxable income. The stock investment amount is part of the shareholders tax basis in liquidation of the corporation. You have been keeping track of the shareholders tax basis have you not? You do have a balance sheet with numbers do you not? Your client is planning to liquidate the corporation with final distribution and final information reporting is he not?

>>Her charging stuff on her credit card has nothing to do with the loan from the corporation.<< However, Depending upon the kind of "stuff" or fraud, the bankruptcy judge may have a claim for some of the stuff. Not very likely.

I agree with JohnH! The corporation still owes the shareholder and I see no indication that the shareholder is not still in good standing with the corporation and still owns the shares. To the corporation the shareholder's personal bankruptcy is irrelevant.

>> A W2/1099 transcript is available.<< I didn't know that!! Damn Jainen you are good! :)

Well... I can understand the feeling since the owner of TTB attacked me years ago with blocking me from the site. It couldn't happen to a nicer guy. Ha!! :)

Sure makes loyal customers feel good!

The IRS is trying to overcome the "cash" under the table business. I'll bet it makes it worse!

>>I think the IRS has better things to do than spy on us<< You got to be kidding! I believe they collect every bit of information available on everything and have access from other sources for the rest. The problem with their information is that it is many times wrong. I currently have a CP2000 proposing additional tax for an amount of income that was clearly reported on a separate line on Sch-F (correctly on line 8b), but the IRS computer still thinks it was not reported. I called the IRS and since they do not have the Sch-F form to look at, with their computer system, they can't see the amount on the tax return as filed. Sooner or later the individual income tax law will be repealed and we will not have to worry about efile or at least it will not be as we now know it.