JohnH

Not so fast there. I'm also voting with the majority, but the superdelegates haven't voted yet.

You all would have to start this string the week I turn 60. Guess I'm going to have to eat some of my words I've already posted on this subject here and on the TMI board.

Did we ever determine whether a deceased taxpayer will receive the rebate? For example, with tax liability on a joint return high enough to qualify for the $1,200 rebate, but one spouse is reported as having died in 2007, will the rebate be $600 or $1,200?

I've had a couple of occasions to do that on other forums, but as you say there's no way to delete a post that I'm aware of. I just edited everything out and entered "Post Deleted" in its place.

I voted yes, but I think they should also be expected to make a generous contribution toward erc's expenses of keeping this forum active. After all, they will be getting some pretty nice advertising aimed directly at a targeted & motivated group - a marketing person's dream audience.

I assume you'd report it in the same manner as the way a minister's w-2 is handled. Report the W-2 earnings on the apprpriate line of the 1040 and then attach a Schedule SE & calculate the S/E tax.

I don't think reconciling on the 2008 return will be a big problem - IRS iwll probably have an on-line lookup like they did the last time around. Of course, I also think that's chargeable time, so my client letter for next January will say something to the effect that "We will need to know how much you received in May-July 2008 for your tax rebate. If you don't furnish us this information there will be an additional charge for us to verify the amount with the IRS before preparing your return."

Has anybody posted this? If so, I apologize for the repetition. http://www.irs.ustreas.gov/newsroom/articl...=179095,00.html

I'm wondering whether it will be worth the time & trouble to prepare a return for a one-time client with virtually no prospect for a long-term relationship, when weighed against what we can reasonably charge for this service. I'm hoping VITA, TCE, and other organizations will gear up for this. If I can find a local contact I think I'll refer anyone who calls me to their services, unless they insist on paying the going rate. This is just off the top of my head, and I'd be intersted in hearing pros or cons from others on this forum.

I think the outfits would be totally appropriate if they changed the tax filing due date to Oct 31.

How far are you into the return? If not far, you might try deleting the client from the current year and starting agiain with a newly rolled over return.

Funny you should mention that. I had a problem getting the Asset Entry screen to let me enter some data today. This was on a client who already had some assets being depreciated and I just wanted to add a new asset. I clicked on a couple of the tabs at the bottom of the screen (Summary, Asset History, etc), then went back to the "Input" tab and it started behaving normally. I don't know why...

I voted in favor of a separate OT section. (Even though I can't remember how I responded when the questions was asked last time)

It is true that direct rebate checks will not be issued after 12/31/08, but there will still be rebate-related refunds issued on 2008 income tax returns for those who qualified for the rebate but failed to receive a check during 2008. (See the last paragraph at the bottom of page 4)

I believe I'd ask the client do they want to pay $120 to have me file the return that may not be needed, or do they want to wait a few weeks to find out if it's necessary to file? Either way, the $300 check won't be here until May or later, so why pay the upfront money if it isn't necessary? Another alternative, if it turns out that they don't get the payment automatically, might be to file a 2008 return in early 2009 and claim the unpaid credit at that time. This is a refundable credit and there will be people who are entitled to it but who don't receive their check in 2007 for a variety of reasons. Those people will be able to file a 2008 return reconciling that they did not receive the payment and it will then be paid to them on the basis of that 2008 return. (For what it's worth, I don't think people having only SS income will need to file in order to get their $300 per person. It should be fairly easy for IRS to wash out the SSA recipients who file a return and send a check to the remainder.)

The cheapskate employers probably never thought to ask for the SS# until after going to have their tax return prepared, because now "They've Got People".

I'm guessing the original question related to a MFJ return with total itemized deductions of about $11,000. (Or a Single with $5,850 or a HOH with $8,250).

Maybe the following info will answer some (but not all) of the questions about who gets what, and when . http://www.house.gov/jct/x-16-08.pdf (Focus on pages 3 - 6) It clearly puts to bed a few of the speculations about the nature of the payment, including: 1) It is clearly a rebate, based on income showing on the 2007 return. 2) It will not be added to income next year. 3) It will not be deducted from 2008 withholdings or added back to 2008 tax. However, we will need to ask clients if they received it and account for it on the 2008 return only because any entitled taxpayer who did not get a check will be able to claim an additional credit on their 2008 return - that seems fair. 4) They did anticipate that not everybody will file on Apr 15, and they did take that into account by stating that extension filers will get their checks after they file. 5) I'm not sure about the $300 credit per child, but it appears that it is also a true rebate and will not affect the 2008 child tax credit in any manner.

One way to do a quick assessment on this is to take a look at last year's itemized deductions and determine if they were just slightly greater than the standard deduction - high enough to make it worthwhile to itemize, but not high enough to produce a complete tax benefit from the state income tax deduction . I'm glad the software does this calculation for us.

You may as well forget this client - it sounds as though she is going to go to the person who will say she can deduct the most, regardless of whether it's legal. The "tax benefits" are one way these party plan promoters try to obscure the fact that very few people make any money doing this sort of stuff. But if she does come back, you should continue to insist that she can't deduct her tanning sessions or her manicures. You should also be prepoared to tell her that she can't deduct pet food and vet bills for her "security cat", no matter how much she insists that the cat guards her inventory when she's away from home. Don't laugh too quickly - sooner or later the party plan supervisor will probably bring this one up.

Bob, Tom, jainen: Thanks to each of you for the responses & the validation. This isn't a client who would try to figure out what they needed to say and then feed me that info, but I have several who would take that approach. It's helpful to know the temperament of each client, isn't it?

I don't see as much of a problem with this as some of you do. What's the big deal? If someone files an extension, they just won't fall in line for the rebate until they do file. That's the way it was handled the last time around and everybody survived (clients, us, the IRS, etc). The only effect I see is that once people realize this, there will be a clamor to file right away and some people won't be as amenable to extensions. I'm going to prepare for that by setting March 12 as my cutoff date - anyone coming in after that date will have to agree to an extension if I need to get one. I usually use March 20 or thereabout, but I'm going to be proactive precisely because of the rebate situation. The legislation says no rebates will be paid after Dec 31, 2008, so I assume Congress anticipated that not everyone would file before the first round of rebates goes out. They seem to understand that people get extensions.... And if any of my clients think it's a silly idea, I'll offer to let them give me their rebate check so they don't have to worry about what to do with that extra money. I might even use their check to buy a wide-screen TV since I'm going to violate the spirit of the rebate by putting my own check in my grandkids' college fund. Finally, there's been a lot of speculation here and on other forums about it being an "advance payment" rather than a straight rebate. I read the legislation and still can't say for sure, but I don't see anything that calls for it to be adjusted out on next year's tax return. It appears to me to be a straight-out payment. In other words, a true rebate.

If somebody would be willing to grade my paper I'd appreciate the help on the following. Taxpayer has $10K of first mortgage interest and $5K of second mortgage interest. There was a refinance of the first mortgage, but no "cash out" when the refinance was done, except for a couple of thousand of refi costs which were added to the principal. When the second mortgage was taken out, approx 50% of the funds were used to improve the home and the other 50% was used to clear up some consumer debt. Taxpayer is subject to AMT, so as I understand it I must adjust out 50% of the interest on the second mortgage on line 4, Part I of the 6251 , but the other 50% of the interest on the second mortgage is still allowable. I'll also need to adjust out a small amount of the first mortgage interest due to the refi costs which were added to the first mortgage. Do I have this right, or am I missing something?

You've obviously violated a tech support rule by solving the problem yourself without waiting the appropriate number of hours for them to get back to you at their convenience while your clients wait. They'll take care of your misbehavior with the next download - beware!

True story: Last year about this time I noticed a college-age snowboarder wearing one of the green crowns. I figured he was either working for them part-time and thought the hat would look cool on the slopes, or else they had prepared a return for him and the hat made an appropriate give-a-way for good customers in a college town. Either way, I've got to say it looked more appropriate on a snowboarder than on the street in front of a tax office.