A dilemma

[taxxcpa]

Unemployment benefits

While
Can the Christmas tree salesmen do the same for the other ~10 months of the year?

FE

I used to sell dark glasses when there was an eclipse of the sun. When there was no eclipse, I drew unemployment benefits. The only reason I was unemployed was, due to no fault of my own, there weren't more eclipses.

[thomtax]

first, the article reads:
". . . .southeastern Louisiana, which for generations have harbored self-reliant nonconformists who don't pay much heed to everyday rules and regulations. '
(my emphasis).

If they are self-reliant, let them live up to their reputation and withdraw their applications for remuneration.
========

and then, we have:
" . . .'This woman in the line next to me told the BP processor she earned $800 a week — in cash — as a deckhand,' he recalled. 'When he asked her for tax statements, she said she had not filed a federal income tax form since 2000. Then she said, "I need a check from you so that I can pay back taxes and then show you the tax records.'"

Could not have said it better myself.
========

"

Couldn't agree more. These "self reliant" people want to have it their way. However, that doesn't include giving up benefits, welfare and anything else they can get from the tax dollars that you and I pay. Their ideal of "self reliant" simply means that they do not pay their share of the bill.

Also, how many times have you heard someone that wants to do it to their benefit and will take care of the correct filings, etc., but somehow never do get around to doing the correct paperwork. Once they get the money, why bother?

LT

[veritas]

Possible solution

The fishermn should look in each fish's mouth for Drachmas.

[JohnH]

Sounds like an interview that starts with the client asking the preparer, "How much fishin' income do I have to report to get the most from that EIC and the max from BP at the same time?"

[BHoffman]

We will probably be giving them the benefit of EIC if they file.

[JohnH]

Just giving them the benefit of the doubt.

[ChEAr$]

1040x

don't apply to the woman or any others who haven't even filed returns.

[Lion]

They got paid

They already got their payments, subsidies, etc., up front by not paying taxes all those years. No double dipping. Why should they get rewarded for breaking the law?!

[FEDUKE404]

What goes around...

While I certainly have empathy for the income losses these folks have incurred, they simply cannot have it both ways.

Not much different from the construction workers being paid "under the table" who then complain when they cannot get workmen's comp if injured or unemployment if the "job" ends unexpectedly.

Of course, I had my own opinions about seasonal tax preparers who filed for unemployment benefits after April 15th. Never quite understood that logic (abuse?) either. Can the Christmas tree salesmen do the same for the other ~10 months of the year?

FE

[JohnH]

There's a positive side to all this. If someone is asking for comnpensation to pay the back taxes on the unreported income they're going to have to show, then there had better be a hefty request for accounting fees to prepare the 1040X and represent them in the inevitable audits to follow.

[travis bickle]

Sorry, this is not a dilemma

it is another example of the "not my fault, so YOU have to bail me out" mentality in this country.

first, the article reads:
". . . .southeastern Louisiana, which for generations have harbored self-reliant nonconformists who don't pay much heed to everyday rules and regulations. '
(my emphasis).

If they are self-reliant, let them live up to their reputation and withdraw their applications for remuneration.
========

then, the article reads:
". . .Another man, who asked that his name not be used because he does not report income from selling hundreds of pounds of blue crab cooked each week in his garage, said he worried BP would turn over records to the Internal Revenue Service."

Sounds like a scofflaw to me. Why is my heart supposed to bleed for him?
========

and then, we have:
" . . .'This woman in the line next to me told the BP processor she earned $800 a week — in cash — as a deckhand,' he recalled. 'When he asked her for tax statements, she said she had not filed a federal income tax form since 2000. Then she said, "I need a check from you so that I can pay back taxes and then show you the tax records.'"

Could not have said it better myself.
========

Folks, I am not voting for natural disasters to wipe people out. The article does not address that, it addresses folks receiving remuneration from BP, a different topic.

Maybe the editor should have used a different headline, something like, "Chickens coming home to roost."

[veritas]

and another reason not to fudge on your taxes.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-oil-spill-claims-20100530,0,4758933.story