JohnH

Lots of mine do as well. I just tell them that for a $200 fee, I can get them an extra 2 months.

Congratulations on a tough job well done. (Are you sure you charged enough? - you didn't say anything about a gasp from the client)

Tom: I did a little reading up on the service after posting the question, and there are several limitations. 1) You can only verify 10 at a time in real time, but there's no limit to the number of batches of 10 you can do. Larger batches can be submitted electronically and results obtained overnight. 2) It cannot be used to verify the number BEFORE the person is employed - only after they are on the payroll. (who came up with this one?) 3) It cannot be used for non-wage purposes. (That's reasonable, but I'd think a third party wouild want to lock the client pretty tightly into verifying the reasons for asking for verification) 4) The employer cannot take any adverse action based solely on the results obtained from SSA. Doing so can subject the employer (and maybe the third party if I'm reading it right) to anti-discrimination or labor law sanctions. At first blush, it looks like a minefield for the employer and/or the third party doing the verifications. On the other hand, if they do step up enforcement this may become a necessity. In any case I'm still looking for input/opinions.

An August 8 article in the NY Times says the Dept of Homeland Security is announcing that they are going to crack down on employers who hire people with false social security numbers. I know, I know - this is the 20th time such threats have been made by various government agencies and then nothing was done. But the political climate this time around may mean they plan to make a few examples and grab some headlines over the issue, especially with an election year coming up. Hopefully one of our clients won't get caught up in the snare. I'm sending all my clients info on the article and how to link to it, just as a precaution. Here's a link to the article - http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/08/washingt...agewanted=print Actually I'm not opposed to enforcing the laws on the books, so this really isn't a rant about the article, but it brings to mind a question. Do any on this forum use the Social Security Number Verification Service (SSNVS) to provide this service for their clients? If so, how do you base your charges? More importantly, what type of disclaimer do you have them sign before obtaining the information for them? Or do you just direct the client to the site and leave it up to them to do their own verification? I'm posting this question in this forum and also over on the Tax Book Forum, as I'd like to hear the collective wisdom on this subject.

I think the funniest ones are those who call during tax season to let me know they are getting their info together and to let me know they will be calling back later to set up an appointment. (Maybe they're just checking to be sure I haven't died).

OldJack: Just so you know where we all stand, I originally thought you MEANT to say "giggle". Does that tell us something about you, or me?

Kea: With respect to knowing or not knowing which country your clients are from, don't you need to know that information when you prepare their TDF90-221 if they still have economic/financial ties to their country of origin?

I like Pacun's method the best. It's better to use the computer to solve a problem than to strain the brain with all that Algebra.

Another good place to look for an old monitor would be a computer repair shop. There's one near my office that sells them for $50. They would probably loan one to you if you asked, especially if you promised to bring the computer to them if it needs repair or to buy a monitor from them if you need one.

The jewelry idea is great, but don't make the mistake of trying it with a debit card. I was really embarrassed by what happened next. The weekend didn't go as planned either.

Why not treat the difference as a note payable to the other shareholder rather than APIC?

I'm glad to hear you're raising your prices. That's all the reason I need to raise mine as well. (I'm always looking for excuses to raise them anyhow - anything will do)

Kea: You may know all you need to know about this client and the entire situation may be strictly on the up & up. But is it worth the risk? You'd be well advised to heed jainen's warnings on this. I wouldn't be anywhere near this transaction and I'd advise the client to contact an attorney knowledgeable about these matters before taking any sort of action. It isn't a matter of accusing anybody of anything - it's simply accepting the realities of the world we live in today.

Many of my clients use EFTPS, but your experience is one reason I don't encourage certain of my clients to use it. For example, the client who is still posting her payroll, sales, and checkbook info in an Appleworks data base on an APPLE IIgs computer.

Thanks KC. Wnnder why they can't provide the same service at their local offices?

You are right on all points. It's also true that I'm still convinced they've crossed the line, especially since they have so much trouble finding the "Print" button when replacement forms are requested..

A person who does some part-time work for me lives near the IRS office, so last week I asked her to drop by there to pick up as many Forms 8109-B as they would hand out. She called from the security desk to say she needed my address & Fed ID number, which we both assumed was a security formality. After giving them the info, she went to the service desk and the person helping her FILLED IN the info on the 8109-B & handed it to her. She explained that she was there to get a few for my office and they told her they can only give out 8109-B forms one at a time & they must fill them in before handing them out. I know IRS wants to do everything possible to force people to use EFTPS, but this is ridiculous. Bureaucrats are frequently petty, but other times I'm convinced they don't know when they've crossed the line between silly and downright stupid

Pacun: Does your client know or have any info on who the thief was? Was the suspected thief any of the following? 1) A son or daughter 2) Any other relative 3) An in-law 4) A friend 5) A spouse or ex-spouse 6) A neighbor 7) A business associate of the client 8) A business enemy of the client

Good suggestions jainen. Maybe the wife should handle the negotiations. The fact that she doesn't speak English and already had the skills to make a fortune in the real estate business can only work in their favor. More or less like a Turkish business owner I worked for years ago. He & I would have great strategy sessions - excellent communcation and complete understanding of our negotiating postion. Then the bankers or suppliers would show up and this guy's English would go to the dogs. He would fake them out of their shoes by constantly pretending to have a different understanding of what they were saying - usually by the end of the meeting we had everything we set out to get and a few extra concessions as well. The first time this happened I looked around to see if he had been replaced by a twin brother who just flew in from Ankara. After a few of these meetings I realized his Jekyl & Hyde command of the English language was a great negotiating ploy, and a very successful one.

Just for the record, I am another one who agrees with jainen & Mike concerning the standard deduction. It also makes for interesting conversation when trying to explain that the home mortgage & property tax deductions are not worth nearly as much as is often claimed for many itemizers.

I think if I ever decide to start efiling, I'll also go ahead & buy me one of those litle round hats with the chin strap and bright-buttoned jackets that the organ-grinder monkeys wear, since it continues to look like the IRS is just priming us to perform for them at their whim.

Jack: I'm with you on this one. Not efiling means at least one less hoop to jump through.

Jack; They exist, but I understand it's a minefield. I've read a few articles about Pension Transfer Trusts - mainly from promoters of the strategy for buying franchises, but haven't done any real research and haven't actually been involved in one. Here is a link to a promoter - not an authoritative resource but maybe a way to begin gathering info. It seems that I recall one of the major drawbacks being the investor can't draw a salary or any type of compensation from the business in which the plan assets are invested. http://www.pensiontransfers.net/_wsn/page5.html

Pacun: I think it has less to do with lenders becoming more responsible and more to do with the meltdown in the sub-prime lending market creasting more heat on lenders to follow good business practices. This, coupled with declines in housing prices in many markets has suddenly shone a spotlight on the problem. As for what to do next, why would your client want to hang onto something he clearly can't afford for 6 more months? Even if the value of the home remains stable or increases a moderate amount, the interest payments he is making are just digging a deeper hole for him. If he can't afford the home now and there's no prospect for a significant increase in its value, why not have the place on the market before the clsoe of business today?

One enhancement is the streamlining of their users' web site. It isn't going to be cluttered with customer service items such as Forums or Communities, since that's clearly a waste of their time & resources and they see no value in it for them.