JohnH

Thanks Judy. That closes the circle nicely.

@cbslee - sorry, I forgot you had started that previous thread. I should have just posted on it rather than starting a new topic.

Interesting point. So if the church is going to be forced to file UBIT anyhow, they may as well start charging those non-member commuters for parking as a means of offsetting the cost of paying the tax.

I sure hope you are correct. But if they actually try to enforce this rule, then church employees who receive mileage reimbursements for employment-related travel would have a hard time also claiming they walk to work. ECFA says they have contacted the office of Congressman Kevin Brady (R-TX), Chairman of the House Ways and Means committee, and the staffers insisted it was intentional. If so, this will mean that virtually every non-profit and tax exempt organization will have to report UBIT.

Recently I've been seeing lots of heat generated by the new tax on parking privileges for employees of churches and non-profit organizations. Just curious if others on this forum have an opinion on it. As I understand it, this tax will apply to all churches and non-profit organizations. It essentially assigns a value to the right to park on premises, even if the parking was free to begin with. Then the organization pays a tax of around 21% on the value of that perk. Can that possibly be the correct interpretation? That in no way levels any sort of playing field, because it doesn't apply to businesses who provide on-site parking to their employees. The provision seems to patently stupid to begin with, I'm surprised that even a politician could think it's a good idea. But maybe I'm the one missing the point.

I clicked on it and it came up as fillable. Maybe it's your browser? (I'm using IE)

@Catherine Does that include Chaos Theory?

Maybe his father-in-law needs to explain how it's deductible since he brought it up. (Generally, father-in-law tax advice isn't quite as reliable as other types, such as hairstylist or mechanic tax guidance. )

A linguistics professor was lecturing his class on negative polarity, negative concord, & litotes, so he stated: "In English, a double negative results in a positive. In many other languages, a double negative simply emphasizes the negative intent. But there is no language known to man in which a double positive produces a negative." From the back of the room, a student mumbled "Yeah, right"

Probably a balloon payment or an ARM reset on a commercial property or rental property. Maybe LLMAS will clarify. I had a very similar situation earlier this year. Had to take the banker to the mat, but they eventually found a way to accommodate the client.

So a positive thought about an electron is repulsive?

Chances are the bank will grant a reasonable extension of the loan (60-90 days would be good). But there are no guarantees, and they probably won't offer it unless the TP puts some pressure on them. The reason is, someone at the bank is going to have to explain the reason for the extension request and their higher-ups aren't likely to take kindly to their subordinates' lack of preparation. So it's easier for them to put the borrower under pressure, hopefully keeping the bank employees under the radar. It it's a long-time, profitable, cooperative client, I might suggest a telephone conference call with the banker & client both on the line. That's the only condition under which I'd speak with the banker. The purpose would be to point out to the banker why an extension/modification of the loan is necessary, and that I've seen other banks do it many times. It might also be an opportunity to point out that this would be a good time for the client to shop the loan around if their bank won't work with them. If it's a marginal client, I might just tell them when I can have the info ready and suggest that they take the timing up with the banker.

Just trying to spark some interesting conversation about current developments.

So, now you're amping up the humor.

Schedule 2+4 and 3+5 are obvious candidates to be combined on the same form. I think one of two things is likely happening here: 1) Someone is under orders from the current administration to create "post card-size forms"; or 2) Someone is intentionally producing something incredibly stupid in an effort to make the current administration look bad.

There will be another letter...

This is one of those areas where a copy of the Audit Techniques Guide can come in handy. Just give a copy of it to the prospective client and tell them "This is what the IRS is going to be looking for if you're audited. I'll be doing your accounting based on this document. Fees will be proportional to the work involved." Then, as LLMAS said, they will probably fire themselves before you ever get started. https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/cashchapter10_210745.pdf

Time to announce fee increases? Or is the prospect of a fee increase, plus hearing about all their friends self-preparing and not itemizing due to the $25K StdDed, likely to cause more clients to try out TT?

Wonder if they will like the tax reduction? I suspect many will fail to recognize it, especially if their refund is less than the prior year. That will take some explaining, but I suspect some tax preparers won't bother with the explanation. Some won't explain because they're too busy; others won't explain because they're politically biased.

I can't claim originality. I got it from Jerry Mealer many, many years ago.

I don't mean to be argumentative, but I just don't get the reasoning, Jack. Most taxpayers are much less 1040-dependent than your average tax preparer who is infatuated with Forms Data Entry. The taxpayer doesn''t have a clue about the layout of the 1040 to begin with. As a matter of fact they are more comfortable with data entry screens than your average ATX-using tax pro. For the most part, they won't make any more errors with the new forms than they did with the old, because they are just answering questions and entering info on a data entry screen just like they did last year. They don't even see a form until they print out their file copy of the already-electronically-transmitted return (assuming they even do that). But I'm willing to admit that maybe I'm missing something big here.

Great pictures, excellent photography. I grew up in the foothills of those mountains. I still enjoy seeing them when they first appear in the distance as we drive back home for family visits. The Blue Ridge and Great Smoky Mountains are beautiful.

Like Ron & Catherine, I've had trouble seeing what the problem is as well. There are so many unused lines on the 1040 for most taxpayers, and it really isn't comprehensive in any meaningful sense. Better to populate the main form with info from supporting schedules. I'm sure there will be tweaks they should still make, but overall I think it's a good idea. I suspect that tax preparers (Drake user, for example) who are already accustomed to using data input screens will not find this problematic. They don't depend upon seeing the 1040 on their screen to achieve data input in the first place, so sub-schedules and distributed input is already more natural to them. It appears that the new 1040 layout actually forces one to become less dependent upon "Forms Based Entry". Maybe that's one reason there's so much angst about it on this forum. And of course as Ron said, at the end of the process you're going to be e-flinging the return anyhow.

How about a per page charge ($1.00 - $1.50 per page, for example), discounted by 25% if the bill is paid within xx days? You choose the per page charge, amount of discount, and number of days as you see fit. (Unless your state has a standard along the lines Lynn mentioned)

Sorry I can't make it, but hoping everyone has a wonderful time. Looking forward to seeing some pictures, videos, newscasts, police reports - whatever.