Friday, August 8, 2014


* Tax professionals – have you seen THE TAX PROFESSIONAL yet?  Why not?  Check it out and let me know what you think.

A special public thank you to Joe Kristan of THE ROTH AND COMPANY TAX UPDATE BLOG for plugging TTP in a recent BUZZ-like Tax Round-Up.

* At CPA TRENDLINES Ed Mendlowitz lists “23 Reasons Clients Really Need YOU for Taxes”. 

While the intended audience of the article is professional accountants and tax consultants, taxpayers can look at it as a list of reasons why they should consult a professional accountant.  All the reasons obviously do not apply to all taxpayers, but many do.

Of course when reading these 23 items delete “CPA” or replace it with “Accountant” or “Tax Pro”.

* I have been preparing taxes for over 40 years, and I had never heard of the term “tax inversions” until the recent debate.  Thanks to Kyle Pomerleau for telling us “Everything You Need to Know About Corporate Inversions” at the Tax Foundation’s TAX POLICY BLOG.

* While on the subject, ACCOUNTING TODAY reports “Obama Blames Accountants for Inversion Trend”.

Hey, BO, if the idiots in Congress create, or allow, a tax loophole accountants, and taxpayers, have a perfect legal right to take advantage of it, whether or not it is “appropriate” or should exist in the first place.   

* Kay Bell give us an “August To-Do List: Vacation, Shopping, School and Taxes” at DON’T MESS WITH TAXES.

* The IRS has some good information in “Topic 157 - Change Your Address – How to Notify the IRS”.

* JK LASSER provides a primer on “Dispositions of Passive Activities”.

The Tax Reform Act of 1986 was “supposed” to simplify the Tax Code.  It did, to some degree, by reducing the number of tax brackets and eliminating deductions.  But in many ways it made the Code even more complicated.  The passive activity rules are a good example.

* Julian Block brings us the word that “Disasters Come with Tax Breaks—Know the Rules” at ACCOUNTINGWEB.

* Kevin Murray of MURRAY TAX SERVICES, LLC explains The Rule of 72 in his post “How Long Will It Take to Double My Money?

* Jason Dinesen rightfully gives “Kudos to NAEA for Promoting EAs” at DINESEN TAX TIMES.

The Enrolled Agent (EA) credential is not well known or understood among the taxpayer public.  The title itself is confusing, and many uninformed taxpayers erroneously think that an EA is an employee or agent of the IRS.  The acknowledgements due to EAs are too often falsely applied to CPAs.  The initials CPA have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with knowledge or proficiency in preparing 1040s – while the initials EA do.

Jason has been a vocal critic of the National Association of Enrolled Agents (NAEA) for failing to properly promote the credential.  But I give them credit when it’s due”, he says in response to two unique new “public outreach efforts”. 

While not an EA myself, I have attempted in my writings to highlight the value of the Enrolled Agent credential as part of my crusade to debunk the totally untrue “urban tax myth” that a CPA is automatically a 1040 expert.

Part of the problem is uninformed journalists who, when discussing an income tax issue, will wrongly advise readers to “consult your CPA” or “check with a CPA” when they should be saying “consult your tax professional” or “check with a tax professional”.  An EA is a proven tax professional.  While a particular CPA may be a knowledgeable and competent tax professional, the mere possession of these initials after one’s name does not in itself indicate that the holder is a tax professional.


No comments: