engagement letters unethical

[jainen]

Disclaimer: This is part of a series of posts that forum moderators have identified as containing “bogus information.”

A new consumer protection policy sharply limits what anyone enrolled or otherwise eligible to practice before the IRS can ask a client to sign. The Director of Practice announced that paid tax preparers can not use private contracts to avoid legal and ethical obligations. While not completely banning engagement letters, the Director emphasized that the agreement must not exceed the provisions of Circular 230. A staff member later assured practitioners the IRS would not initiate audits solely for compliance, but would start requiring a copy of any engagement letter to be attached when submitting Form 2848.

[Black Bart]

Goodbye to engagement letters.

You were much more comforting when you were merely inflicting blunt trauma on individual posters rather than unleashing these devastating missives of mass destruction.

But...thanks anyway.

[OldJack]

A staff member later assured practitioners the IRS would not initiate audits solely for compliance, but would start requiring a copy of any engagement letter to be attached when submitting Form 2848.

And if you don't have an engagement letter what are they going to do... not accept your power of attorney form for representation? I have never used engagement letters.

[veritas]

My guess

is this has come about because of those companies who are advertising you can settle for pennies on the dollar. You know time is running out on that one time chance.

[Taxref]

Would need to see the details

The basic message, though, does not seem to be anything new.

Its a long-standing legal concept that engagement letters and/or exculpatory clauses cannot be used to contract away one's obligation not to be negligent. I am sure some unscrupulous accountants/tax preparers attempt to use engagment letters for that purpose.

[Brad Imsdahl]

In case you haven’t noticed yet, jainen has decided to play games with members of this message board by posting bogus information. It started with Form 8332-AMT, http://www.thetaxbook.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3665 , then Std mileage for stolen cars, http://www.thetaxbook.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3702 , then Tax-deductible fast food, http://www.thetaxbook.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3692 , and finally, this thread on engagement letters unethical.

None of which are true.

Humor has its place. Be careful not to go overboard with it. We may never again take your opinions on tax issues seriously.

[jainen]

may I continue?

Now who is calling who a liar? Well, Brad, at least you are telling the truth.

The serious tax season is not too far off, so I thought a little holiday diversion would be welcome. How about if I clearly label these stories with a disclaimer--may I continue?

[Brad Imsdahl]

Yes, you may continue with a disclaimer. I think your stories are great, up to the point when I see others taking them serious.

[OldJack]

Now who is calling who a liar? Well, Brad, at least you are telling the truth.

The serious tax season is not too far off, so I thought a little holiday diversion would be welcome. How about if I clearly label these stories with a disclaimer--may I continue?

Jainen you dog. You sure pulled the wool over my eyes.

[DonPriebe]

Tax and Political Jokes

The problem with tax jokes is that they are sometimes taken seriously.

The problem with political jokes is that they are sometimes elected.

[Black Bart]

Disclaimer

Jainen you dog. You sure pulled the wool over my eyes.

is the very first word in his post, Jack. and "bogus information" is italicized. Still, I took it the same way you did (guess I just skipped over that headline), but no way we could say he didn't give fair warning.

Well; crisis averted -- the price of tacos isn't going up (never mind about engagement letters and standard mileage).

[taxmandan]

is the very first word in his post, Jack. and "bogus information" is italicized. Still, I took it the same way you did (guess I just skipped over that headline), but no way we could say he didn't give fair warning.

Well; crisis averted -- the price of tacos isn't going up (never mind about engagement letters and standard mileage).

The initial post did not have the disclaimer. Like you, I saw the first post and was going to ask for the cite for this information and wondered if it would apply to Form 8821 too. Now it has the disclaimer. What made it look legit is that it sounds like just the sort of thing some IRS staff weenie would dream up. Good one!

[Black Bart]

Yeah, it does.

What made it look legit is that it sounds like just the sort of thing some IRS staff weenie would dream up. Good one!

I wonder if it's a mixture of fact and fiction? Excuse me while I go ask.

Ahem....Say jc...(if we're still speakin') -- is there anything at all or in part of these that's true or new? They seem well-crafted and if they were taken verbatim from the net, they'll probably be spread far and wide without the disclaimer that you included.

[jainen]

the world changes

>>What made it look legit is that it sounds like just the sort of thing some IRS staff weenie would dream up. Good one!<<

Thank you. That was one of my main purposes, to illustrate that our tax system is so bizarre that sometimes you can't even tell if the most absurd things just might be true--like standard mileage for a stolen car! Maybe we are too willing to accept such nonsense from our government.

Anyway, I wrote up a dozen of these things so I'm glad Brad said I could go ahead. I think they're funny, but I also hope they will generate some serious discussion about whether they could be true if the world were only a very tiny bit different. Considering that the world changes all the time.