two bank accounts

[jainen]

for the birds

Oh, you're right.

Sometimes I think the best thing to do would be set up in the mall on January 26 and slam out those EIC RAL's for the off-the-books construction workers claiming their girlfriends' kids. This service and professional and ethical nonsense is for the birds.

[Gene V]

“Additionally, a Provider must never charge a separate fee for Direct Deposit and must accept any Direct Deposit election by a taxpayer to any eligible financial institution”
this is from page 17 Pub. 1345. This Publication was printed in 2004, now that we will have a new form (8888) for split Direct Deposit, they may change the wording and let us charge for split deposit. Just my opinion.
.

[jainen]

I don't think so

>>Publication was printed in 2004.... they may change the wording and let us charge<<

Naw, I don't think so. You see, the thing is, some CPA-type lobbyists have already asked, and the IRS has already answered.

So be sure to include it in your year-end letter: "The IRS has authorized me to split your refund into multiple bank accounts. To thank you for returning to my office this year, I will be offering this great new option AT NO ADDITIONAL CHARGE."

[Roland Slugg]

Guessing game with the calendar

...would be directing part of the refund to an IRA account. Some people do not contribute until they have their refund, and this will give them a chance to make the deposit and not forget to do it before April 15.

Yes, and this is one of the "selling points" the IRS makes when touting this new option. But there is a risk ....

Up to what date will you do this for clients: (A) who mail a paper return, or (B) who e-file?

The deposit must actually be made to the IRA by April 15th. Would you assume that a return e-filed, say, on April 5th would have the IRA portion of the refund direct deposited by the 15th? What date is far enough ahead to be safe? How about a paper return? March 15th? March 1st? Earlier?

I'm with those who won't make a peep about this new option, and if a client asks about it, I'll try to talk him out of doing it for IRA (or SEP) funding.

[Snaggletoof]

Can't buy the idea

...that IRS will not allow preparers to charge for the laborious calculation of separate tax liabilities and payments. (It's not simple or quick - if you are adept in the theory you still have to allow for the customer to provide separate information).

...What I DO believe is that IRS is not going to allow a separate fee for the trouble it takes to arrange for separate deposits AFTER this calculation is made. This is from the quotes I have read in the posts above...

...I believe they are applying the regulation so that preparers who charge an extra $15 for E-filing for electronic deposits will be precluded from charging $30 just because there are two deposits.

[Unregistered]

This is the actual IRS language - note paper files can charge extra.

"Guidelines which govern the e-file program preclude tax preparers who file electronically as IRS authorized electronic return originators (EROs) from charging clients for the preparation for Form 8888, Direct Deposit of Refund. These guidelines do not extend to tax preparers who do not file electronically.

Publication 1345, Handbook for Authorized e-file Providers , specifically provides that an ERO “must never charge a separate fee for direct deposit and must accept any direct deposit election by a taxpayer to any eligible financial institution.” The fact that an additional form is required for taxpayers to split the direct deposit of their refunds among several accounts does not alter the Publication 1345 requirements.

This guidance emanates from the IRS’ Issue Management Resolution System (IMRS), a streamlined and structured process that facilitates stakeholder issue identification, resolution and feedback. IMRS captures, develops, resolves and responds to significant national and local stakeholder issues. When stakeholder organizations notify the IRS of questions about IRS policies, practices and procedures, SL researches the issues to bring about resolution."

New York Enrolled Agent

[Black Bart]

IRS: Creative. Responsive.

IRS’ Issue Management Resolution System (IMRS)...facilitates identification, feedback...resolution...issues

"Guidelines preclude tax preparers...from charging clients for...Form 8888..."

New York Enrolled Agent

IRS publicity guys -- what can you say? How do they handle such "hot potatoes"? Use common sense? Just say "Sure, you do the work, you charge for it"? Nope. Too logical. Besides; that's the wrong "verdict." So, hand it off to IMRS (probably created for just such "issues").

The procedure: "Study" it, let preparers and consumer advocates put in their two cents worth, then issue the previously decided result (was it ever in doubt?) of "no charge".

IRS wants people to file electronically -- lightening up service center workload. No-cost convenience (love those freebies) encourages the public to go EF. The only downside: preparers do more work for nothing. But, hey, two outta three ain't bad.

My wife has one of those IMRS "systems," although hers is considerably more efficient.
It goes so:

Identification: The tool shed needs painting.
Feedback: Skip this part.
Resolution: I paint tool shed.
Issue: What issue?

[LawrenceGR]

Extra Paperwork

Why not charge people who want to split (Husband & Wife) for doing a MFJ vs MFS worksheet. I have clients that want this done every year, I try to explain to them that for tax purposes they are one unit.

[Jiggers]

Fees for MFJ vs MFS

Why not charge people who want to split (Husband & Wife) for doing a MFJ vs MFS worksheet. I have clients that want this done every year, I try to explain to them that for tax purposes they are one unit.

I do charge extra for this worksheet. I have one or two clients who believe that each owns their own income and it doesn't belong to the other, even in this community property state.

I also add a fee for e-filing a return and I add a fee for making a copy of the return to mail to the IRS. But, it is included in my total fee, I do not provide an itemized bill for the client. I will probably add a fee for splitting the refund, but again, in my total fee, not as part of an itemized bill.

[taxea]

two bank accounts

Not charging for the refund form has nothing to do with having to allocate the refund between spouses...that part of the work is chargable. taxea

[Uncle Sam]

two bank accounts

Through constant changes in the business environment, we tax preparers have emerged from being responsible for preparing returns, to also being responsible for filing, and now IRS wants to burden us with being responsible for electronic submission of refunds. It seems that "tax simplification" seems to go one way - simplifying for IRS, burdening the practitioner development with responsibilities that belong to the government.