Corduroy Frog Posted April 11 Report Posted April 11 Yes, we all are amazed when we think we hear the "grand champion" idiocy from our clients. I've got to think hard to wonder if I've heard anything like this before... Client has a farm - has had for a few years. So this year he buys a 2024 FORD F450 truck. (Those of you who know anything about trucks know what a beast and expensive this thing is). Drives it 4000 miles for Farm Use only. This is not a 1975 Ford F150, or a hay truck with a long bed. It is a Ford F450. Brand new. Didn't keep a log because he thought Farm Use only means that he didn't have to keep one. Needless to say, I told him to take his taxes somewhere else. 1 Quote
Max W Posted April 11 Report Posted April 11 You could have used actual expenses - gas, maintenance, insurance, etc. This way it doesn't matter what the mileage was, if it was 100% farm use. Then tell the client to keep a log from here on. 4 Quote
jklcpa Posted April 11 Report Posted April 11 4 minutes ago, Max W said: You could have used actual expenses - gas, maintenance, insurance, etc. This way it doesn't matter what the mileage was, if it was 100% farm use. Then tell the client to keep a log from here on. But if the actual method is used in the first year, then the client must continue to use that and can't ever switch to cents-per-mile method. 2 Quote
Lion EA Posted April 11 Report Posted April 11 And if he parks it at the house (commuting) or uses it to haul his daughter's furniture to her new apartment or stops at the grocery store on the way home or...he still better have a log to document biz/farm vs personal/commuting use. 1 Quote
Abby Normal Posted April 11 Report Posted April 11 37 minutes ago, jklcpa said: But if the actual method is used in the first year, then the client must continue to use that and can't ever switch to cents-per-mile method. With low mileage and high vehicle cost, actual will likely be better until it's fully depreciated. But it's always a tough call. 1 Quote
Corduroy Frog Posted April 11 Author Report Posted April 11 I thought it was so preposterous I didn't even go into the other methods. There has to be concern as to whether such an expense is ordinary/necessary, and also whether we are being told the truth. 2 Quote
Lion EA Posted April 11 Report Posted April 11 Our clients can spend their money foolishly. But their record-keeping better be accurate and organized, so I can make sense of what's deductible. 6 Quote
Catherine Posted Tuesday at 01:02 AM Report Posted Tuesday at 01:02 AM On 4/11/2025 at 5:28 PM, Corduroy Frog said: and also whether we are being told the truth. The instant I think a client is not being truthful, they become an ex-client. That's a hard red line for me. 4 Quote
schirallicpa Posted Wednesday at 02:03 PM Report Posted Wednesday at 02:03 PM You have to consider as well that a smaller truck cannot haul heavy trailers. I have a client that has a nice 350 that I know is occasionally used for personal stuff (hauling the boat.) But if you consider how much a loaded trailer weighs when you load a piece of equipment on it thats weighing 20,000 lbs, you need a pretty big engine to move that thing, and stop that thing. Then add a few hills or mud, then he needs a big truck. He needs to keep track of usage, but this kind of truck is basically a piece of equipment. I tell my farm and contractor clients to take pictures of the trucks hauling something heavy so when asked I can let the auditor from NYC know that this truck has a purpose. 6 Quote
JohnH Posted yesterday at 03:20 PM Report Posted yesterday at 03:20 PM On 4/11/2025 at 5:28 PM, Corduroy Frog said: I thought it was so preposterous I didn't even go into the other methods. There has to be concern as to whether such an expense is ordinary/necessary, and also whether we are being told the truth. Client has probably been watching too many episodes of “Yellowstone”. Wants to project the Kevin Costner look when riding into town. Maybe wearing a logo vest as well? it’s probably good you passed on the engagement. Think about all the bad things that always happened when John Dutton didn’t get his way. It often ended with a trip to the “train station.” 3 Quote
mcb39 Posted yesterday at 04:14 PM Report Posted yesterday at 04:14 PM Just saying! I have never liked this rule. Quote
BulldogTom Posted 2 hours ago Report Posted 2 hours ago On 4/11/2025 at 4:28 PM, Corduroy Frog said: I thought it was so preposterous I didn't even go into the other methods. There has to be concern as to whether such an expense is ordinary/necessary, and also whether we are being told the truth. If you think the client is lying, then by all means you should decline. That is your call not mine. I don't think a behemoth of a truck is preposterous for a ranch. 2 tons of feed in a trailer going up hill....on the freeway....at 70 mph. It takes a truck. A man sized, full power, get through the mud truck. I just wish we could plug in an app like the insurance companies do and at the end of they year it would spit out a mileage log so we don't have to guess where it was parked and driven. Maybe the next Acting Commissioner (fifth, sixth...I lost count) can make a rule that they have to have that device to get a mileage deduction... how cool would that be? Pipe dreaming Tom Longview, TX 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.