Mad tax preparer

[DaveO]

Elimination of all refundable credits would be the quick fix

Or at least no longer refunding the money as cash. Issuing a card similar to the one used by the food stamp program would keep the EITC funds out of the underground economy.

The tax system should collect the money to fund a limited federal government. It should not be an anti-proverty program or worse a social engineering program.

We don't offer RALs so don't have a huge EITC business. However a long term client came in last year and wanted to let her live in boyfriend claim one of her kids to "help his taxes". I explained that was not allowed and prepared her and the boyfriends returns. This year she comes in without the boyfriend and tells me "I don't get to claim this child this year". It took me all of 2 or 3 seconds to put the picture together.

[jainen]

the benefits that others need

>>The tax system should collect the money to fund a limited federal government. It should not be an anti-proverty program or worse a social engineering program. We don't offer RALs so don't have a huge EITC business<<

Dave, it is natural to feel that the tax system should benefit your own clients, and disparage the benefits that others need.

[DaveO]

Jainen, The fact that we don't offer RAL's

Is not a disparagement of anyone. We just think they are a lousy deal for the consumer and choose not to offer them. EITC clients combined with a RAL is very profitable. HRB and JH have built large successful businesses on this model. We however, cater to small business owners and higher net worth retired people. Retirement planning, payroll and monthly books are a significant part of our business.

The EITC clients we do service have learned that if they will wait an extra week to 10 days for a refund they can have their return done for about 1/2 what the big store front firms offer. The fact that we price our simple W-2 returns well under HRB rates attracts value minded clients who stay with us even after they make too much money to qualify for the EITC. We work as hard as anyone does for all our clients to insure the lowest legal tax bill. That doesn't mean we are blind to obvious abuse of the system.

This thread seemed to be about how abuse of the EITC has distorted our business. I'm an Enrolled agent not a moral authority. It's not my job or desire to pass moral judgment on anyone. However it's very clear that the system is being gamed and the easiest way for the IRS to solve it would be to take away the ball and go home. I resent the increased workload and document retention requirements forced on preparers in an attempt to correct the problem congress has created with refundable tax credits.

[jainen]

double-talk

>>not a disparagement of anyone<<

What a bunch of double-talk! "Not a disparagement"? What else should we think when you call it "a lousy deal" and whine about the "obvious abuse" and how our business is "distorted"? That sounds mighty disparaging to me. And hey, is your solution to go after the cheaters? No, it's "to take away the ball" and not let anyone get the credits that our elected representatives have voted for. That's not a very credible position, Dave, except as a political statement.

You don't like the increased workload for refundable credits, but don't seem to object to the increased workload for your small business clients. My observation is that small business owners are far more abusive of tax rules than the EIC crowd is. Anyway, it appears that your service to EIC clients is only worth half what they get from the franchises. That's pretty disparaging, too.

[DaveO]

Doubletalk?

I truly expected more than an ad hominem attack and a disparagement of my abilities of which you have no direct knowledge. Our fees are low for simple returns because we seek to cultivate long term relationships. Even at that we usually take a post-dated check from our EITC clients.

I have no trouble separting my politics from my work, onthe other hand your attitude towards business would certainly give me pause if I were a small businessperson seeking tax help. And that’s not a political statement.

[Zee]

>>not a disparagement of anyone<<

What a bunch of double-talk! "Not a disparagement"? What else should we think when you call it "a lousy deal" and whine about the "obvious abuse" and how our business is "distorted"? That sounds mighty disparaging to me. And hey, is your solution to go after the cheaters? No, it's "to take away the ball" and not let anyone get the credits that our elected representatives have voted for. That's not a very credible position, Dave, except as a political statement.

You don't like the increased workload for refundable credits, but don't seem to object to the increased workload for your small business clients. My observation is that small business owners are far more abusive of tax rules than the EIC crowd is. Anyway, it appears that your service to EIC clients is only worth half what they get from the franchises. That's pretty disparaging, too.

Janien-

I have to admit. I'd like to see the EIC eliminated. There are simply too many abuses, and must be a better way to help those that really need it, rather than tying welfare-type programs to the the IRS code.

[jainen]

Nothing personal.

>>an ad hominem attack and a disparagement of my abilities <<

Be fair. I said nothing, NOTHING about you or your abilities. I quoted your own words and expressed my opinion of your politics (yes, wanting to change the law in a certain way -- that's what politics is) and your business practices such as pricing. Nothing personal.

[jainen]

I respect that

>>I'd like to see the EIC eliminated.<<

I respect that as a reasonable opinion, well-supported and honestly stated, even though I disagree.

If the purpose of the tax code were to eliminate opportunities for abuse, I would suggest we outlaw the standard mileage allowance. The easy documentation is an open invitation to illegally claim commute and other personal use, and the temptation traps far more taxpayers and cost the government enormously more than the entire EIC program.

But, of course, the purpose of the tax code is not to eliminate opportunities for abuse. And if it ever becomes so, it will be the end of our free economy. In my opinion.

[DaveO]

Nothing?

>>not a disparagement of anyone<<

Anyway, it appears that your service to EIC clients is only worth half what they get from the franchises. That's pretty disparaging, too.

I thought that sounded a little personal.

[Brad Imsdahl]

I thought that sounded a little personal.

Any more personal and this whole thread gets deleted. I don't care who started it.

Why don't you guys go back to work and get some more tax returns finished.

[Zee]

>>I'd like to see the EIC eliminated.<<

I respect that as a reasonable opinion, well-supported and honestly stated, even though I disagree.

If the purpose of the tax code were to eliminate opportunities for abuse, I would suggest we outlaw the standard mileage allowance. The easy documentation is an open invitation to illegally claim commute and other personal use, and the temptation traps far more taxpayers and cost the government enormously more than the entire EIC program.

But, of course, the purpose of the tax code is not to eliminate opportunities for abuse. And if it ever becomes so, it will be the end of our free economy. In my opinion.

You're correct, the purpose of the tax code isn/t to eliminate opportunties for abuse, it's to collect taxes. Administrative rules should ensure compliance. But, certainly the purpose of the tax code and IRS shouldn't be to administer social welfare programs. I haven't seen the numbers and don't have any idea how many dollars are fraudulently claimed in EIC. But, my guess is it's a very large number. Is it greater than other methods of cheating? Probably not. But, why create programs where the internal controls are so lax they foster dishonesty? And, why part of the tax system? I don't think it would take a rocket scientist to find a better way to help those in need, and reduce the opportunity for fraud.

[gkaiseril]

Have you considered interviewing the client and explaining what their filing stats will be and if they are entitlled to EIC and other credits. You can give them and estimate of the cost of their return. YOu also might want to tell them there is a minimum fee for doing a return whether they accept the return or not.If they do not like it, let them wlak. If after you do their return and they are not happy and want to go someplace else, fine.

Keeping their papers might cause you problems and ill will in the meighborhood. You would be better off getting them out of your office and life.

[Black Bart]

Even if you

Any more personal and this whole thread gets deleted. I don't care who started it.

Why don't you guys go back to work and get some more tax returns finished.

do delete it, you have to admit that we have a mighty interestin' bunch here and the champions of "diversity" would be proud. I bet Vince got a lot more comments than he figured on (by the way, what was that question he was askin' about?).

I'm in there with the boys somewhere -- either nuke the whales or give everybody a guaranteed annual income. Too, I'd take KaiserBill's advice and just get everybody that's givin' me a hard time right out of my office and life, except I'd have to get a divorce and nobody else works that good as cheap.

[Black Bart]

Hey Dixie,

BB, I think that IRS should be able to go after any male taxpayer that files HH and
claims EIC for any delinquent child support on that child. I think this would do
away with a lot of EIC fraud. I know it will never happen, but just a thought.

DixieEA

Sorry, but I didn't see your post layin' there in the midst of this fray -- come on in (but no cussin' allowed).

I see you mentioned a male taxpayer claimin' HH and I think maybe jainen (he's very sensitive) might take this as "gender bias" (it's a California thing), so would you mind statin' if you're male or female so we can tell if you're bein' objective or not?

I like that line about "just a thought" 'cause I post those all the time and this ungrateful bunch of wretches just goes on posting all around me like I hadn't thought a thing...but we do the best we can. Welcome aboard.

[Snaggletooth]

Dixie is a ....

...female, probably, Bart. As one who never missed a child support payment, I have quite a disdain for those who don't pay up. I don't think just males should be singled out, but off hand I don't remember any females who had to pay it.

At any rate, Dixie, we're glad to have you. Ease up on the rest of us guys.