Desk side manners, IV

[Bees Knees]

Desk side manners is the concept of how we treat the emotional needs of our clients. Similar to the bed side manners of a medical doctor, desk side manners attempts to “heal” the taxpaying client who has just discovered that the law does not treat his or her tax situation in a way expected.

Similar to Ethics I, II, and III, we will discuss the proper way to deal with our clients when it is necessary to tell them their concept of the tax law is not exactly in line with the rules.

Scenario:

Unmarried mother is a stay at home mom with her daughter. She has a live in boyfriend who supports her and her daughter. She does not need to file a tax return because her income from a part time job is only $5,000. She does not need the dependency exemption to wipe out her tax.

Since the boyfriend is providing over half the support for the entire household, he would like to file HOH and claim his girlfriend and her daughter as dependents. He is not the father of his girlfriend’s daughter.

The law says he cannot claim HOH because neither the girlfriend nor her daughter is a blood relative. He cannot claim the girlfriend as a dependent because she made too much money, and he cannot claim her child as a dependent because the child is a qualifying child of the mother.

How do you break the news to him?

[Unregistered]

I'm always very truthful about what I say. In this situation I would happily tell my client that his congressman together with theIRS caused his unfortunate problem. Next time, vote for somebody different.

[DonPriebe]

And the bright side is ...

And point out that although he cannot benefit from his living situation, the mother can file and get the earned income credit.

[Bees Knees]

And point out that although he cannot benefit from his living situation, the mother can file and get the earned income credit.

Good point. I should have addressed that. Lets say the boyfriend's earned income is $14,000. His EIC would far exceed her EIC, if he were allowed to claim the kid as a dependent.

[Snaggletoof]

Excellent Poll

Good Poll. This is a real life situation -- and there is scarcely one amongst us who does not encounter a carbon copy of this scenario at some point during the season.

I can't vote because I can't sign on, but my vote would be to select the button which allows his congressman to shoulder the blame. The practitioner gets to "cop out" by blaming someone else. Sorta like Adam when called upon to account for why he ate the fruit -- was about to blame TWO people at the same time: "This WOMAN that YOU gave me..."

Yes, there is enough blame to go around. But cop out or not, none of the blame should fall on the practitioner for these regulations.

Bart, you posted earlier -- you out there this fine Thanksgiving morning? Callie is in the kitchen and doesn't want me in there to mess up dinner -- so the TMI has the pleasure of my company this morning....

[jainen]

fill in the blank

>>His EIC would far exceed her EIC, if he were allowed.... <<

True. And his tax would be less if he were allowed to deduct household maintenance and utilities like his landlord can. And it would be [fill in the blank] if he were allowed to [ .... ]. But he isn't allowed to.

I never apologize for the tax laws. They are what they are and they ain't what they ain't. If the client wants tax planning services, we can develop some options. Generally that isn't as easy after-the-fact, but even then there are a number of choices and the whole spectrum of how "aggressive" to be in those choices.

As for the poll, we don't need to be no ivory tower about this. We all had the actual situation last February, and I'm sure we all handled it similarly--with sympathy and firmness.

[Bees Knees]

I’ll never forget a situation I had with new clients several years ago. This was before the new rules last year. A newly wed couple came to me to have their taxes done. She was raised in a religion that disfellowshiped members for sexual immorality. She moved in with a guy and had some kids with him. Several years latter, they got married in an attempt to mend family relations with her parents. Their prior year returns, as two singles, showed huge refunds as she qualified for HOH and EIC. As a married couple, their combined income took her out of EIC. The difference between filing as two single taxpayers and being married cost them over $4,000 in additional taxes and lost EIC.

I had to try to explain that the law punishes married couples at their income levels, and encourages them to stay single. I felt uncomfortable about being placed in the middle of such a situation, because I believe morally they did do the right thing by getting married. They never came back the following year, so I have no idea whether they stayed married.

[Gene V]

Bees Knees,

I had a similar situation, the couple where married and I showed them how much they would save if they were single, the next year they both came in as singles, then the year after, only the man came in, I asked him where his ex-wife was, he said, since they were divorced, she decided to move out of the house and live with her mother. Now he is remarried to another postal worker. (They all worked for the Post Office). Now, I’m more careful what I say about tax savings for married couples vs. Single or H of H.

[veritas]

What is the figure now? 37% of children born out of wedlock. The problem is only going to get worse.

[Black Bart]

Deskside manners from the dark side

>>

As for the poll, we don't need to be no ivory tower about this. We all had the actual situation last February, and I'm sure we all handled it similarly--with sympathy and firmness.

Yeah, Snag -- I'm around, but that dadgum jainen hurt my feelin's (I can dish it out, but I can't take it too well) and I'm retreating into my ivory tower and getting away from it all. "Acerbic," indeed -- I've never been called that before and don't even know what it means (I refuse to go look it up), but it sounds bad. I'm gonna start callin' him "erudite" and drop the "e."

But anyway, I'm takin' his advice and handling this problem with "sympathy and firmness."

Client: I still wanna claim Velma's kid. Here's the divorce papers that say I can.
BB: Sorry, Judge Judy's full of beans and those papers don't amount to a hill of 'em. It's all in Kenfield v. United States, 783 F.2d 966 [57 AFTR 2d 86-792] (10th Cir. 1986). You know about that, I guess?
Client:
Client: Listen; I need money.
BB: Oh! Well, that's different. Just go on over to JH's place -- they'll do it for you.
Client: I know -- I did it last year when you turned me down. They said it was "no problem."
BB: Yeah, that American ingenuity, entrepreneurship, and competition -- it's great, ain't it? So long and good luck.

[Lion]

What I'd do...

What I'd tell my client, did in fact tell several clients, is response #1. But, I wouldn't be as flip as it sounds, even though I sometimes wanted to be when they were blaming me for making a mistake. I told them in the manner of response #2. So, since the topic has to do with our deskside manners, I voted for #2. I truly felt the frustration of the guys who really support their "families" and also of the widowed older moms in their too-big houses who house their grown in their first jobs or recuperating following a divorce or too lowly paid to rent in NYC where their job is or.... I guess I've explained it well if no body cries.

[Joe Btfsplk]

Common law wife?

If their state recognizes common law marriage, then they might qualify to file jointly and solve all problems that way.

[jainen]

somthing pretty good

>>"Acerbic," indeed -- I've never been called that before and don't even know what it means<<

I don't know what it means either. It might have something to do with oranges. Anyway, it wasn't MY word -- Bees used it to describe me, so I figured it must be somthing pretty good.

[Sour]

Most of us have come to the point where we expect this kind of acerbic response from Jainen

I think you need to read the post again, it was Snaggletoof not Bees Knees who use acerbic.

[jainen]

what y'all think of me

>>it was Snaggletoof not Bees Knees<<

Thanks, you are right. He put Bees's name in boldface at the top of his post. Was that to confuse me?

I AM confused. If "acerbic" was Snag's word, then why is Black Bart complaining to Snag about ME using it?

I don't even think acerbic is a real word. It's an anagram code for breccia, which is a sedimentary rock made of sharp fragments in a sticky base. Is that what y'all think of me?