ain't so, Snuffleupagus! IRS to practitioners: Drop dead!
I can't believe it. While poaching on the "other" board, I noticed a poster referred to new IRS Form 8901 and, unbelievably, during the act of "simplifying" the many varying rules for CTC, HH, EIC, dependents, etc., they have created...ANOTHER FORM...and I quote (from Google):
IRS has released a draft of new Form 8901, Information on Qualifying Children Who Are Not Dependents, for 2005. The form must be used by a taxpayer claiming the child tax credit (CTC) when the dependency exemption cannot or is not claimed. According to an entry in Federal Register on August 1, 2005:
BECAUSE OF CHANGES MADE TO INTERNAL REVENUE CODE SECTIONS 24 AND 152, IT IS NOW POSSIBLE TO HAVE A CHILD WHO IS A QUALIFYING CHILD FOR PURPOSES OF THE CHILD TAX CREDIT BUT WHO IS NOT A DEPENDENT.
The absurdity of creating an additional form to simplify anything seems self-evident to me.
Oh well, who knows? It may actually be good for us; I'm too overwhelmed to even look into it.
I can't believe it. While poaching on the "other" board, I noticed a poster referred to new IRS Form 8901 and, unbelievably, during the act of "simplifying" the many varying rules for CTC, HH, EIC, dependents, etc., they have created...ANOTHER FORM...and I quote (from Google):
IRS has released a draft of new Form 8901, Information on Qualifying Children Who Are Not Dependents, for 2005. The form must be used by a taxpayer claiming the child tax credit (CTC) when the dependency exemption cannot or is not claimed. According to an entry in Federal Register on August 1, 2005:
BECAUSE OF CHANGES MADE TO INTERNAL REVENUE CODE SECTIONS 24 AND 152, IT IS NOW POSSIBLE TO HAVE A CHILD WHO IS A QUALIFYING CHILD FOR PURPOSES OF THE CHILD TAX CREDIT BUT WHO IS NOT A DEPENDENT.
The absurdity of creating an additional form to simplify anything seems self-evident to me.
Oh well, who knows? It may actually be good for us; I'm too overwhelmed to even look into it.
Comment