Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Preparer Reg.

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
    #1

    Preparer Reg.

    After careful consideration of the input provided, the IRS believes that taxpayers, tax administration and the tax professional industry and related service providers will be better served through the implementation of a number of changes. The recommendations are addressed in detail in the following documents:

    · http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/...217781,00.html
    · http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/...217782,00.html
    · http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/...217785,00.html
    · http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/54419l09.pdf

    Please note that none of the changes are effective for the immediate filing season beginning January 2010.

    Any thoughts?
    Tags: None
    #2
    Newslink IR-2010-001

    If you subscribe to IRS's Newslink you probably got or will be getting Newslink IR-2010-001 in your email late this afternoon. It gave a rather lenghtly but good synopsis of the documents Tax referred to. I tried to find a link to the document I referred to but it is not posted on IRS's website yet.

    I really don't want IRS agents playing the part of a secret shopper and stopping at my business but I wouldn't have anything to worry about if they did even though I am not an enrolled agent or a CPA. I understand a need to keep our business regulated but I think the government could do it better than some of what is suggested.

    Comment

      #3
      Spies

      I have no problem with being spied on as long as I get my fee. However it does seem to me that someone could put in their engagement letter a jurat from the client that they are not working for or with any taxing agency and have given their real names so that one could not be prosecuted. I think that instead of or in addition to these measures one could use electronic countersurveylance devices to interfere with recording of the interview.

      Comment

        #4
        It is nice to be in the "In" group for once. I'm in NY and EAs have been on the outside for too long.
        This post is for discussion purposes only and should be verified with other sources before actual use.

        Many times I post additional info on the post, Click on "message board" for updated content.

        Comment

          #5
          Professional Organizations

          I am sure that all our Professional Organizations, including those open to un-credentialed preparers favored something along these lines. There are plenty of very good un-credentialed preparers but it's obviously easier to get away with being ignorant or dishonest if you are un-credentialed. I felt for a long time that Federal Licensing was a poor idea but I have seen the light.

          Does anyone know what this is going to do to State Credentialed folks or why they are not exempted for purposes of work done in their States? Does anyone have a guess as to whether the States will simply drop their credentialing programs?

          Comment

            #6
            Trade Organizations?

            Originally posted by erchess View Post
            I am sure that all our Professional Organizations, including those open to un-credentialed preparers favored something along these lines. There are plenty of very good un-credentialed preparers but it's obviously easier to get away with being ignorant or dishonest if you are un-credentialed. I felt for a long time that Federal Licensing was a poor idea but I have seen the light.

            Does anyone know what this is going to do to State Credentialed folks or why they are not exempted for purposes of work done in their States? Does anyone have a guess as to whether the States will simply drop their credentialing programs?
            Just what about our professional trade organizations and what are they doing? We have NSA, NATP, NAEA, and even AICPA involved in keeping track of Congress, writing good articles, and holding various hearings. However, I don't detect that the IRS or Congress is doing anything other than giving lip service to their efforts.

            This is not the fault of our trade organizations, but simply put, none of them have the kind of political clout essential to influence legislation. Of the aforementioned, the AICPA is probably the strongest, simply because they are the singular organization in the governance of their constituency. The tax prep orgs are fractious by comparison, and no preparer is required to be a member of any of them. And even the AICPA was not strong enough to stop Congress from passing the counterproductive Sarbanes-Oxley act.

            The big problem with not listening to our organizations is that Congress will eventually proceed half-cocked with their own solutions, having no roots in common sense or even workability. Their legislation will be much more influenced by special interests such as exemptions for special groups and regional considerations to woo reluctant congressman.

            Addressing your comment about state regulators, I believe most states will follow the course of least resistance -- and that will be to piggy-back onto federal legislation. You will then see a consortium of state and Federal authorities "Tag-Teaming" against preparers just as they now Tag-Team taxpayer collections. Some few states, such as Oregon, have already earned a reputation for having their own teeth and will proceed on their own.

            Comment

              #7
              Snags

              You left out NSTP.

              However your assertion that Congress doesn't listen much to the professional organizations may be on the money. You are both more formally trained and more experienced than I am.

              However I belong to two of the organizations and they both sent me emails on Monday to the effect that the IRS had listened to THEM and come up with a workable plan that included most of what they asked for. By the way, you cannot have been unaware that in 09 the IRS spent a great deal of staff time hosting forums where interested tax professionals of all sorts including representatives of all the Organizations were able to talk about what preparer regulation should look like. Based on quick reading of repeated emails from my professional organizations it seemed to me that there was a strong consensus. Based on reading today's emails but not the detailed documents they referenced I thought that the consensus had won the day. Time will tell I guess but I see this new regime as having a chance to weed a few people out of the profession who are unethical and/or incompetent thus taking pressure off me to do things I know are wrong in order to keep clients.

              We all know now that there will be two exams relating to 1040 returns, one on wages and family issues and one on small business issues. Will someone who has passed only the first exam be unable to do a Sch C? Will someone who has passed both be able to do entities or will they suddenly become the domain of the Enrolled?

              Comment

                #8
                Washington Post article

                Here is a link to an article about the proposed changes that was in the morning edition of the Washington Post.

                http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/04/AR2010010401651.html?wpisrc=newsletter&wpisrc=newsletter&wpisrc=newsletter

                Comment

                  #9
                  Here is the link I received from NAEA.

                  404 | Internal Revenue Service
                  http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/54419l09.pdf
                  404

                  Comment

                    #10
                    I read the Washington Post

                    article, and at the end it says that many tax preparers "got it wrong" in the GAO testing. I'm curious as to how complex the returns were, because the line between wrong and right in this business is pretty much non-existant in some cases.

                    That said, I'm all for the new regulations. As an unenrolled preparer, I was planning to get my CPA this year anyway, so this gives me even more incentive to get it done.

                    ATG
                    "Congress has spoken to this issue through its audible silence."
                    Anyone ever notice they beat the daylights out of the definition of a child, but they don't spend much time at all defining "parent"?

                    Comment

                      #11
                      Local Newspaper

                      This discussion site is great. I just got a call from a reporter of our local newspaper who is doing an article on this. He wanted the perspective of an unenrolled agent. The threads on this message made me sound like I even knew what the heck I was talking about!!

                      Comment

                        #12
                        I had

                        Originally posted by Mike Mac View Post
                        This discussion site is great. I just got a call from a reporter of our local newspaper who is doing an article on this. He wanted the perspective of an unenrolled agent. The threads on this message made me sound like I even knew what the heck I was talking about!!
                        An e-mail in my inbox from MPR yesterday afternoon looking for input - at that point I didn't even know anything had passed.

                        ATG
                        "Congress has spoken to this issue through its audible silence."
                        Anyone ever notice they beat the daylights out of the definition of a child, but they don't spend much time at all defining "parent"?

                        Comment

                          #13
                          IRS shoppers

                          As far as I know, I've never in all these long years been 'shopped' by an IRS sneak.

                          But I think we all need to keep this in mind. My policy is always when taking on a new client
                          to find out who referred him, and to demand to see last year's tax return. This should weed
                          'em out.

                          Of course I could easily say I'm not taking on any new clients.

                          Or how about this one? Whip out a letter of engagement which stipulates a non refundable retainer fee of $50 before work commences?
                          ChEAr$,
                          Harlan Lunsford, EA n LA

                          Comment

                            #14
                            Payment

                            Does anyone know whether the IRS Mystery Shoppers pay for their returns? I had assumed that they did pay and if they did not I would be quite angry. They also would not take away anything written by me without paying unless of course they gave me counterfeit cash or a bad check.

                            Comment

                              #15
                              Originally posted by TAX View Post
                              After careful consideration of the input provided, the IRS believes that taxpayers, tax administration and the tax professional industry and related service providers will be better served through the implementation of a number of changes. The recommendations are addressed in detail in the following documents:

                              · http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/...217781,00.html
                              · http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/...217782,00.html
                              · http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/...217785,00.html
                              · http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/54419l09.pdf

                              Please note that none of the changes are effective for the immediate filing season beginning January 2010.

                              Any thoughts?

                              So, how many investigators are going to be hired to check tax offices for unlicensed preparers? They'll need 5,000 or so to try and even come close to chasing down the unlicensed. Then it will be a process of giving the preparer 30 days to document that they actually have a license (theIRS database will be unreliable), 60 days to appeal any proposed fines before action will be taken. By June 20th theIRS will move against those card table preparers, just as soon as they can find them.

                              The inept will have the shield of a national 'license' that's says they know what they are doing. The tests won't be anywhere near the level of the SEE, it will be dumbed down to the level of public school 'gradiates' else the chains will have difficulty finding 'preparers.'

                              Also, this will diminish the status of EAs, now all preparers will have federal licenses and the public will have even less understanding of the credentials some of us have earned.

                              Yeah, great idea.
                              "A man that holds a cat by the tail learns something he can learn no other way." - Mark Twain

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next

                              Disclaimer

                              Collapse

                              This message board allows participants to freely exchange ideas and opinions on areas concerning taxes. The comments posted are the opinions of participants and not that of Tax Materials, Inc. We make no claim as to the accuracy of the information and will not be held liable for any damages caused by using such information. Tax Materials, Inc. reserves the right to delete or modify inappropriate postings.

                              Working...
                              X