A new tax practice opening in D.C.

[JohnH]

OK folks, Dashle just apologized to the Senate committee.
Just like the situation with Geithner - all is forgiven, so it's time to move on.

[BP.]

Come down on . . . the preparer . . . but not the taxpayer.

For real?

[erchess]

Responsibility

I guess for me the bottom line is that the taxpayer and the tax professional both have responsibilities for the return. If the return is wrong as to the facts of the client's life then it may be appropriate to sanction the taxpayer or the professional or both or neither. But if the return is wrong as to the interpretation of law, the only possible sanctions should be laid on the professional. Now when I say sanctions I am not including the additional tax plus interest which of course the taxpayer should pay. And I'm not oblivious to the fact that in many cases it isn't so clear when a return is being examined whether the problem is that the taxpayer provided wrong information (whether deliberately or not) or that the professional provided incorrect interpretation of the law.

But put it this way - if the trouble a client gets in because of a given return is NEVER AFFECTED by the fact that the return was professionally prepared, well that certainly explains the increasing numbers of self preparers.

[joanmcq]

i don't think the car & driver would be on his W-2 because they were not provided by his employer...it was a 'friend'. But wouldn't he have to report this as a gift? Lawmakers can't keep gifts over a certain value.

[JohnH]

I'm beginning to think we're looking at this Rangel, Daschle, Geithner situation all wrong. After listening to Mark Steyn today I've changed my viewpoint and have decided we should be celebrating their views on taxation.

A discussion that often comes up in my Sunday School class revolves around the disconnect between what we SAY we believe and what we actually DO believe. If I act contrary to my stated beliefs, do I really believe what I say? For example, if I say I should treat others with respect & dignity and then I go to lunch and act rude & inconsiderate toward the waitperson, I've given you some valuable insight into what I actually believe. That is, I REALLY believe it's OK to mistreat others as long as I profess that I believe the opposite. My actions are the real key to my core beliefs.

Applying that to our friends in Washington, I've concluded that these three are actually closet conservatives who just profess to be Liberal Democrats. Sure, they pretend to adhere to a political philosophy which teaches that it's OK to steal one person's property and give it to another via the tax system. But when it comes to their personal economy they actually practice a philosophy which recognizes that the individual is much better at allocating resources than any government entity can be.

We may not agree with their methods, but rather than rag on them for their technical oversights (for which they've duly apologized), we should be encouraging them to release their inner conservative and fight for the broader principles they are actually endorsing via their actions. I feel better about them already.