Filing past years

[erchess]

But Bart

As far as I know only one client of the many I have advised that they did not need to file can actually prove that he saw me. This client years ago asked me to prepare the returns anyway and sell them at the then prevailing fee. I thought that he was filing them and I wondered why he did not get the famous "You didn't need to file and unless your situation changes please stop filing." letter. When I found out he was filing them only in his drawer I prevailed upon him to accept letters stating that he did not need to file. At that time my employer provided those to longstanding paying clients at no charge.

But I was assuming that the clients in OP paid no fee and had no proof of what the original preparer told them and that the original preparer does not keep records of cases where the firm tells a potential client that they do not need to file and the potential client departs without paying a fee. If I'm right about all that then I think everything I said is true. If the client can prove what they told the preparer and it turns out that the preparer erroneously told the client that the client did not need to file then yes I think the preparer is going to pay a significant penalty and I don't think that is unfair or unreasonable. After my first two hours out of the 24 hours of class before I entered this business I could un-failingly have told someone whether they needed to file. I'm sorry but if one of us gets the "Do I have to file?" question wrong when we have all the information, it's malpractice.

[Black Bart]

Okay.

As far as I know only one client of the many I have advised that they did not need to file can actually prove that he saw me. This client years ago asked me to prepare the returns anyway and sell them at the then prevailing fee. I thought that he was filing them and I wondered why he did not get the famous "You didn't need to file and unless your situation changes please stop filing." letter. When I found out he was filing them only in his drawer I prevailed upon him to accept letters stating that he did not need to file. At that time my employer provided those to longstanding paying clients at no charge.

But I was assuming that the clients in OP paid no fee and had no proof of what the original preparer told them and that the original preparer does not keep records of cases where the firm tells a potential client that they do not need to file and the potential client departs without paying a fee. If I'm right about all that then I think everything I said is true. If the client can prove what they told the preparer and it turns out that the preparer erroneously told the client that the client did not need to file then yes I think the preparer is going to pay a significant penalty and I don't think that is unfair or unreasonable. After my first two hours out of the 24 hours of class before I entered this business I could un-failingly have told someone whether they needed to file. I'm sorry but if one of us gets the "Do I have to file?" question wrong when we have all the information, it's malpractice.

You may be right .

I'm just sayin' IRS is gunning for us. While I don't document stuff like I should, I've gotten better, adding little tweakers to my engagement letter and making up my own "non-filer" form that lists income type/amount and a jurat that this is all the income. I get a $20 fee for going through their papers and filling it out (copies for me and them). Some I don't document (probably should) or charge; for example, the guy who says "I've only got $12K Social Security; do I have to file?" Answer: "No."

P.S. Don't mention that word "malpractice." Its errors and omissions (that's what our insurance is for).

[erchess]

I wish

that I thought B B was paranoid but I think he is right on all counts.