WWTBAM Bored

this Tax Season is the first "down" one in about 15 years. Thank goodness, all of my key investment clients are still on board, but the prospective future full service financial planning clients, short formers and children of my long standing clients have really flaked out! Maybe they have all learned Turbo Tax?
I'm glad I didn't turn 5 existing clients loose as I had originally planned because attrition has more than made up for my usual overworked condition at this time.
I know most BB's are "do it yourselfers" when it comes to Income Taxes, but are your friends and relatives jumping on that bandwagon as well?? Or should I take things personally?

dodgersteve182 wrote:I know most BB's are "do it yourselfers" when it comes to Income Taxes, but are your friends and relatives jumping on that bandwagon as well?? Or should I take things personally?

Nothing personal, but calculating our taxes shouldn't be something that requires professional help, particularly for those who use the short form and for young people (the children of your long standing clients) who likely also use the short form or have very simple long form returns.

"Nothing personal, but calculating our taxes shouldn't be something that requires professional help, particularly for those who use the short form and for young people (the children of your long standing clients) who likely also use the short form or have very simple long form returns."

I agree 100% with your Views, Tax Preparation in 50% of my Cases certainly could be termed as a Luxury Item. I think people give up luxuries first when a Recession or economic downturn is eminent.

I've only turned to professional tax help - well, H&R Block, actually - once, the year after we got married. We had the federal forms and two states to contend with, including some grant money income from grad school for both of us. I just threw up my hands and gave it to someone else to handle. When I saw what they charged (some 28 years ago), and how little they actually did, I vowed to do it myself from then on.

I've given BD the same tax advice for next year - seek professional help. They'll have two states plus the federal, military income and deductions, not to mention possible moving expenses. I'm not even gonna try to do it for them. I hope the military has some tax advisers to help out, since this has to be a common occurrence.

We have a Type S corporation, so an accountant is necessary for our taxes.

My 25 year old son, who bought his first house this year, had his first job for 12 full months ^was a true "tax payer" for the first time, said Turbo Tax worked like a charm for him. Hope he's right.

I'm really good with numbers, but with our regular taxes, my husband's primary business, secondary business, our rental home, and the hospital stipends he get being classified as SEP income, I figure I save a bundle of money paying the acountant to do the taxes.

No way this is for anyone but a pro.

I hire a professional. The farm and so forth. Plus I lose depreciation on the barns in Mid-2009-so I have to strategically plan income streams around that upcoming change.

I got a phone call this afternoon from one of my oldest client's sons telling me his mother (my client) has just died. This is the third client to pass away since January 1st. That's one reason we need to keep obtaining new clients, although the death transcends any feelings of business lost.
I will be attending the funeral on Thursday.

dodgersteve182 wrote:I got a phone call this afternoon from one of my oldest client's sons telling me his mother (my client) has just died. This is the third client to pass away since January 1st. That's one reason we need to keep obtaining new clients, although the death transcends any feelings of business lost.
I will be attending the funeral on Thursday.

The death transcends lost business, but maybe your late client's son will realize that she still has to file a return for 2007, dead or alive, and somebody has to calculate estate taxes, too.

You'll be hearing from the son again.

Don't take it personally. TurboTax can easily handle the one area of calculation we hired an accountant for, and then we were in Tgirl's boat -- appalled at how much they charged and how little they actually did.

I'm in Steve Forbes's boat -- everyone should pay her/his/its 7% and we're done.

I'm in Steve Forbes's boat -- everyone should pay her/his/its 7% and we're done

Amen, sister!

t.

SportsFan68 wrote: I'm in Steve Forbes's boat -- everyone should pay her/his/its 7% and we're done.

Why, Sprots, you ol' Republican, you!

AnnieCamaro wrote:

dodgersteve182 wrote:I got a phone call this afternoon from one of my oldest client's sons telling me his mother (my client) has just died. This is the third client to pass away since January 1st. That's one reason we need to keep obtaining new clients, although the death transcends any feelings of business lost.
I will be attending the funeral on Thursday.

The death transcends lost business, but maybe your late client's son will realize that she still has to file a return for 2007, dead or alive, and somebody has to calculate estate taxes, too.

You'll be hearing from the son again.

Got a shiver from this. What's the forward version of deja vu? I'm gonna be in this same boat one day, hopefully not soon. Mom has been using the same accountant that Dad used for his business. The firm is now run by the sons, but Mom gathers up all her records every year and brings them down there. She has to be literally and figuratively one of their oldest clients.

MarleysGh0st wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote: I'm in Steve Forbes's boat -- everyone should pay her/his/its 7% and we're done.

Why, Sprots, you ol' Republican, you!

Thank you, Marley.

Don't I wish! Forbes spent some ungodly amount of his own money and got an Arizona primary victory and maybe one other state -- Delaware?

In other words, I guess I can't be even an honorary Republican since almost all y'all were supporting Dole or Buchanan.

I brought up Forbes and the flat tax in Toastmasters a couple months ago and drew a bunch of blank looks, even amongst the accountants.

SportsFan68 wrote:I'm in Steve Forbes's boat -- everyone should pay her/his/its 7% and we're done.

I'm pretty sure the numbers don't come close to working that way. In other words, if the flat tax rate were only 7%, I don't think we'd come close to matching the revenue now derived from income tax. And the shortfall would need to come from somewhere.

That's the basic problem with the flat tax. For the numbers to work, the rate needs to be high enough to impose a real burden on the bottom end of society. That's why I'm glad we have a progressive tax system. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:I'm in Steve Forbes's boat -- everyone should pay her/his/its 7% and we're done.

I'm pretty sure the numbers don't come close to working that way. In other words, if the flat tax rate were only 7%, I don't think we'd come close to matching the revenue now derived from income tax. And the shortfall would need to come from somewhere.

That's the basic problem with the flat tax. For the numbers to work, the rate needs to be high enough to impose a real burden on the bottom end of society. That's why I'm glad we have a progressive tax system. --Bob

Aye, there's the rub. Forbes' point was that lots of people and corporations avoid taxes altogether because of paper losses and offsetting depreciation and a myriad other dodges written into tax laws by the folkses who will benefit. In the current system, the only way to be absolutely certain of a revenue stream is to collect that W-4 amount every day in millions of paychecks and make sure nobody claims exempt with the horrific threat of monster taxes owed plus huge penalties for underwithholding, which my ex and I learned about the hard way the year we both got big promotions and raises. This while his boss was using his accountant and every trick in the book to keep his taxes well under 28%, and my employer didn't pay taxes because it was a governmental entity.

Forbes demonstrated conclusively that if EVERYBODY paid 7% every year instead of dodging or deferring for years, it would exceed current revenues.

But I can't be a Republican, because I bought into a plan that made so much sense, and all y'all were stomping Forbes flat, except in AZ and DE.

Bob78164 wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:I'm in Steve Forbes's boat -- everyone should pay her/his/its 7% and we're done.

I'm pretty sure the numbers don't come close to working that way. In other words, if the flat tax rate were only 7%, I don't think we'd come close to matching the revenue now derived from income tax. And the shortfall would need to come from somewhere.

That's the basic problem with the flat tax. For the numbers to work, the rate needs to be high enough to impose a real burden on the bottom end of society. That's why I'm glad we have a progressive tax system. --Bob

There's also the matter of the impact that this might have on charitable giving - like it or not people give in order to get the tax deduction. Take that away and the incentive for giving goes down and less money is given to those organizations that need it.

Mike Huckabee's flat tax rate was to be 23%. No exceptions. Of course, corporations don't pay taxes--they just collect them from the consumer.

SportsFan68 wrote:

MarleysGh0st wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote: I'm in Steve Forbes's boat -- everyone should pay her/his/its 7% and we're done.

Why, Sprots, you ol' Republican, you!

Thank you, Marley.

Don't I wish! Forbes spent some ungodly amount of his own money and got an Arizona primary victory and maybe one other state -- Delaware?

In other words, I guess I can't be even an honorary Republican since almost all y'all were supporting Dole or Buchanan.

I brought up Forbes and the flat tax in Toastmasters a couple months ago and drew a bunch of blank looks, even amongst the accountants.

I was a Forbes guy, but he was out of the race by the time we got around to Texas.

Oops.

Actually, I was an Alan Keyes Guy, but Forbes was my second choice.

ne1410s wrote:Mike Huckabee's flat tax rate was to be 23%. No exceptions. Of course, corporations don't pay taxes--they just collect them from the consumer.

The Huckabee plan was not a flat tax on income, but a 23% tax on goods and services. his plan called for the elimination of all Income, Estate, Gift, Capital Gains, and any other Federal taxes.

Many people thought this meant that the cost of goods and services would go up by 23% under the plan. This is not true. Currently, economists calculate that 22% of every dollar spent on goods and services is going to pay Federal taxes, so the increase, if there was one at all, would be negligible.

cal:

The Huckabee plan was not a flat tax on income, but a 23% tax on goods and services. his plan called for the elimination of all Income, Estate, Gift, Capital Gains, and any other Federal taxes.

This is all true. My bad.

Both the Sub S Corp and personal taxes are done by 'a guy'. I don't think he is an accountant. I think I pay him a total of about $700 a year to do all of the payroll taxes and the income tax returns.

Amy says I am getting ripped off. It is worth it to me.

peacock2121 wrote:Both the Sub S Corp and personal taxes are done by 'a guy'. I don't think he is an accountant. I think I pay him a total of about $700 a year to do all of the payroll taxes and the income tax returns.

Amy says I am getting ripped off. It is worth it to me.

You've got a good deal. I paid $500 a quarter for my "S' corp accounting.

earendel wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:I'm in Steve Forbes's boat -- everyone should pay her/his/its 7% and we're done.

I'm pretty sure the numbers don't come close to working that way. In other words, if the flat tax rate were only 7%, I don't think we'd come close to matching the revenue now derived from income tax. And the shortfall would need to come from somewhere.

That's the basic problem with the flat tax. For the numbers to work, the rate needs to be high enough to impose a real burden on the bottom end of society. That's why I'm glad we have a progressive tax system. --Bob

There's also the matter of the impact that this might have on charitable giving - like it or not people give in order to get the tax deduction. Take that away and the incentive for giving goes down and less money is given to those organizations that need it.

SteelersFan gives what I consider to be a ton of money to Ducks Unlimited, Elk Unlimited, Trout Unlimited, and National Wild Turkey Federation, and I give what he considers to be a ton of money to the American Red Cross, the local homeless shelter, the American Cancer Society, and the alumni foundation of my alma mater. We don't benefit one penny from all that on our income tax; we do it because we believe in it. I just wonder how many people are in our boat and how many in Ear's.