In honor of Bad Poetry Day, I am throwing
out the first mal-poesy.
How badly can you do?
THE SLOW CLIENT BLUES
by TaxMama
The time is near
to finish all returns,
to send them to our clients dear
and allay all their concerns
It only took them 7 long months
while we stack files and sat on our buns,
waiting, waiting for clients to-do lists
to be do'd while we clenched our fists.
Finally, finally, the simple return
missing only the interest is done
and we have time to burn
and go out and have so fun!
----------------
Now, it's your turn.
Please use the COMMENTS button to add your own worst shot.
Be sure to identify yourself and include a link to your website.
Fine print (get our your magnifying glass): By sumbitting your awful poetry, you are authorizing TaxMama and all TaxMama-related companies and businesses, to reprint your worst effort anywhere and anytime...attributing that dismal work oto you.
Also, please feel free to use the COMMENTS button to vote on the worst poetry.
Thursday, August 18, 2005
Friday, August 05, 2005
Serendipity
Oh my goodness! Last summer, an old friend died.
Two week before he died, he called me and entrusted me
with caring for his son. Now, since his son was middle-
aged, you wouldn't think that would be such an issue.
But Dad had sheltered him so well from financial matters
that his son didn't even have any of his own credit.
And Dad left debt - but substantial equity in his home.
It's been a year now. It's almost the anniversary of Dad's
death. And Son just called me with the latest update on
his financial situation.
He has a job interview next week.
Some History
During the past year, Son has sorted out all of Dad's
financial issues. He's become adept at working with
his attorney to have the credit card companies settle
some of Dad's debt. He's paid the rest. He's established
credit of his own, to the point where he is getting those
solicitions from the credit cardcompanies inviting him
to 'sign here'.
I promised his dad that I would find a way for Son to
stay in the home, even though the mortgage payments
would eat up all of his annual earnings. We tossed
around some ideas to make it possible for him to stay
for at least 7 years, to get him on his feet, and to buy
time to build up additional equity in the home.
Since he couldn't afford the payments on the residence,
I advised him to get a roommate. Then, once his finances
were stablized, we'd sit down and talk about using some
of the money left over to get an education and to learn a
more marketable skill, and/or start his own business.
The plan was that he would use a negatively amortized
mortgage to keep his payments low. He knowingly would
eat into the home's equity for five-to-seven years, until
he could raise his income. (This is not advice I normally
give. TaxMama usually discourages negative loans.)
In his case, he knows the equity will increase dramatically
because of an adjacent development of $10 million homes.
He and his neighbors are already getting offers to buy their
homes for over 5 times what Dad had paid for it. So, it isn't
a gamble.
Son followed my advice and got a roommate. What a disaster!
He literally kicked that guy out the day after he moved in.
Yet, the day Son kicked him out, another tenant called
wanting to move in. He did.
It Changed His Life
Talk about serendipity! Because he got the roommate,
Son is being invited to apply for a position at one of the
top companies in the world, with a recommendation -
from his roommate. When Son gets the job next week,
even if he starts in the most menial of positions at this
company, his financial future will be set on a secure,
healthy path, with full benefits and growing income.
He will never have to start a business and run the risk
of failure, or of losing his inheritance. (This worried me
greatly, due to his previous lack of experience with
finances and managing a business. Though, he's learning
so quickly!)
Of course, he will probably still get educated, but the
cost is likely to get picked up by his employer - and
he'll have a specific focus on what he ought to study.
And the Point is?
Where is all this going? Is this just some TaxMama brag?
Hardly.
This is about doing something that so many people don't
do after a death or divorce.
It's about being patient - and making plans.
Too often, when we experience something tragic, like the
Big Ds, we just want to push everything and everyone away.
We want to clean house, literally and figuratively.
You just want to end the pain, and just brush away all
the things that bring you painful memories.
You want to end the pain, so you want to settle all
the issues too quickly, taking the shortest, fastest route.
Or you've been numbed by the pain and just don't do
anything...hoping it will all take care of itself.
Or you're trapped in the pain. It becomes a comfort.
It becomes a safe, familiar friend, so you don't le tgo
of anything, you don't resolve or finish anything, because,
somehow, it gives you a connection to the person who died,
or to the good part of the marriage you once had.
So, here are TaxMama's Tips for Tragedies
1) Don't throw anything away for at least one year.
Anything you think should be discarded, put into a
separate place to review when you're sanity returns.
2) Don't give anything away for at least one year.
If it wasn't a bequest in the will or a promise made,
set aside the things you want to give away until you
can evaluate if you're giving it away out of painor out
of love and generosity. If it was out of pain, hold on to
it a little longer. You may decide you do want it after all.
3) Don't just throw money away because things are
too complicated for you. If you can't deal with things,
get help - ask for help from family or friends whom
you trust. If there's no one, find a good, reliable tax
and financial professional to help you. Remember, after
a death, I've seen many people arrange for a substantial
part of the deceased's debts to be discharged or charged
off by lenders. Your finances can become more manageable.
4) Don't dump your home because you can't afford it.
Pause. Think. If you're willing to reduce your standard
of living anyway, is there a way to keep the home by
getting a roommmate, or turning it into a bed and
breakfast, or...come on, think. Use your imagination.
How can you keep your home, so you don't kick yourself
later. (If I had bought my ex out of our house and kept
that home - today, I'd have no mortgage debt; my payments
over the years would have been closer to $400/month
instead of $1,500 - $2,000/month; I'd have been able to
collect a healthy stream of rental income from it for
decades; and I'd have over half a million dollars in
equity today. What would you have if you hand't just
rushed through your divorce or post-death trauma?)
5) If you only have a limited amount of money, and
not too many skills, or not much education, don't just
invest the money in securities. Invest it in yourself.
Sit and think about what you want to do. Use that
money to get an education or training to learn a new
career, or to start abusiness, or to hire help who can
ensure that your existing business starts to prosper.
Two week before he died, he called me and entrusted me
with caring for his son. Now, since his son was middle-
aged, you wouldn't think that would be such an issue.
But Dad had sheltered him so well from financial matters
that his son didn't even have any of his own credit.
And Dad left debt - but substantial equity in his home.
It's been a year now. It's almost the anniversary of Dad's
death. And Son just called me with the latest update on
his financial situation.
He has a job interview next week.
Some History
During the past year, Son has sorted out all of Dad's
financial issues. He's become adept at working with
his attorney to have the credit card companies settle
some of Dad's debt. He's paid the rest. He's established
credit of his own, to the point where he is getting those
solicitions from the credit cardcompanies inviting him
to 'sign here'.
I promised his dad that I would find a way for Son to
stay in the home, even though the mortgage payments
would eat up all of his annual earnings. We tossed
around some ideas to make it possible for him to stay
for at least 7 years, to get him on his feet, and to buy
time to build up additional equity in the home.
Since he couldn't afford the payments on the residence,
I advised him to get a roommate. Then, once his finances
were stablized, we'd sit down and talk about using some
of the money left over to get an education and to learn a
more marketable skill, and/or start his own business.
The plan was that he would use a negatively amortized
mortgage to keep his payments low. He knowingly would
eat into the home's equity for five-to-seven years, until
he could raise his income. (This is not advice I normally
give. TaxMama usually discourages negative loans.)
In his case, he knows the equity will increase dramatically
because of an adjacent development of $10 million homes.
He and his neighbors are already getting offers to buy their
homes for over 5 times what Dad had paid for it. So, it isn't
a gamble.
Son followed my advice and got a roommate. What a disaster!
He literally kicked that guy out the day after he moved in.
Yet, the day Son kicked him out, another tenant called
wanting to move in. He did.
It Changed His Life
Talk about serendipity! Because he got the roommate,
Son is being invited to apply for a position at one of the
top companies in the world, with a recommendation -
from his roommate. When Son gets the job next week,
even if he starts in the most menial of positions at this
company, his financial future will be set on a secure,
healthy path, with full benefits and growing income.
He will never have to start a business and run the risk
of failure, or of losing his inheritance. (This worried me
greatly, due to his previous lack of experience with
finances and managing a business. Though, he's learning
so quickly!)
Of course, he will probably still get educated, but the
cost is likely to get picked up by his employer - and
he'll have a specific focus on what he ought to study.
And the Point is?
Where is all this going? Is this just some TaxMama brag?
Hardly.
This is about doing something that so many people don't
do after a death or divorce.
It's about being patient - and making plans.
Too often, when we experience something tragic, like the
Big Ds, we just want to push everything and everyone away.
We want to clean house, literally and figuratively.
You just want to end the pain, and just brush away all
the things that bring you painful memories.
You want to end the pain, so you want to settle all
the issues too quickly, taking the shortest, fastest route.
Or you've been numbed by the pain and just don't do
anything...hoping it will all take care of itself.
Or you're trapped in the pain. It becomes a comfort.
It becomes a safe, familiar friend, so you don't le tgo
of anything, you don't resolve or finish anything, because,
somehow, it gives you a connection to the person who died,
or to the good part of the marriage you once had.
So, here are TaxMama's Tips for Tragedies
1) Don't throw anything away for at least one year.
Anything you think should be discarded, put into a
separate place to review when you're sanity returns.
2) Don't give anything away for at least one year.
If it wasn't a bequest in the will or a promise made,
set aside the things you want to give away until you
can evaluate if you're giving it away out of painor out
of love and generosity. If it was out of pain, hold on to
it a little longer. You may decide you do want it after all.
3) Don't just throw money away because things are
too complicated for you. If you can't deal with things,
get help - ask for help from family or friends whom
you trust. If there's no one, find a good, reliable tax
and financial professional to help you. Remember, after
a death, I've seen many people arrange for a substantial
part of the deceased's debts to be discharged or charged
off by lenders. Your finances can become more manageable.
4) Don't dump your home because you can't afford it.
Pause. Think. If you're willing to reduce your standard
of living anyway, is there a way to keep the home by
getting a roommmate, or turning it into a bed and
breakfast, or...come on, think. Use your imagination.
How can you keep your home, so you don't kick yourself
later. (If I had bought my ex out of our house and kept
that home - today, I'd have no mortgage debt; my payments
over the years would have been closer to $400/month
instead of $1,500 - $2,000/month; I'd have been able to
collect a healthy stream of rental income from it for
decades; and I'd have over half a million dollars in
equity today. What would you have if you hand't just
rushed through your divorce or post-death trauma?)
5) If you only have a limited amount of money, and
not too many skills, or not much education, don't just
invest the money in securities. Invest it in yourself.
Sit and think about what you want to do. Use that
money to get an education or training to learn a new
career, or to start abusiness, or to hire help who can
ensure that your existing business starts to prosper.
Friday, July 08, 2005
War of the Worlds
FILM REVIEW - War of the Worlds
http://www.waroftheworlds.com
by Steven Speilberg
If you're an H.G. Wells fan or an S-F afficionado, you will find yourself compelled to shell out the high price to see War of the Worlds on the big screen. The special effects are well worth the cost of the film.
But if you're looking for a script that makes any sense, or characters that you can bear to follow for the whole two hours of the film, or a plot that doesn't tax your intelligence - I have two words for you - STAY AWAY!
I suppose that I could have overlooked those flaws, being an avid science fiction fan and reader since age 4 - except for all the shreiking in the theater....uh, coming from the screen.
Speilberg certainly got lazy with his directing - and his screenplay.
1) Was it really necessary to have Dakota Fanning (as the little daughter) shrieking and whining all the time? That stupid character never shut up. Me, me, me, me, me... She was a spoiled, insensitive, annoying and distracting idiot. What a waste of a perfectly good, young actress.
Besides, let's look at reality, during real danger, even children have the sense to shut up and listen and let their parents guide them. Really bad writing.
Didn't Spielberg trust his film enough to believe we could handle our own screaming?
2) Tim Robbins, as Harlan Ogilvy, was apparently supposed to be playing the Curate character from the book. In the book, the Curate goes mad and never stops babbling or making noise, and endangers their position.
If Tim Robbins was playing insanity... that didn't come through. He just seemed annoying and afraid. Those scenes really could have been directed much better.
Besides, there really wasn't much character development - or perhaps they cut out those scenes?
And Spielberg's writers, Josh Friedman and David Koepp, never explain why, with all the people running down that hill, with the fire licking at their heels, why Tim Robbins ONLY invites Tom Cruise and Dakota Fanning into his little hidey-hole.
3) The ending, the epilogue. This is H.G. Wells' version:
And strangest of all is it to hold my wife's hand again, and to think that I have counted her, and that she has counted me, among the dead.
It's satisfying.
Spielberg's on the other hand...well, I'm not going to tell you his ending. But suffice to say, it makes no sense, considering the overall context.
But, there is one really poignant moment at the end, that is well acted and believable.
And Mariann Mayberry, playing the ex-wife is excellent.
Overall, noisy, noisy, noisy, great effects, poor writing. If I had to rate it, I'd says about 2.5 stars.
Speilberg has done some wonderful, magical, amazing films. This isn't one of them.
Is anyone still writing movies with actual plots?
I don't remember the book being this insipid. Do you?
Not sure? You can read the whole book online!
War of the Worlds, by H.G. Wells
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/www/warworlds/warw.html
(And my octogenarian mother wanted to see this? I can see her now!)
If you'd rather stay home and enjoy your favorite film -
You can download them for a lot less than theatre prices.
http://www.waroftheworlds.com
by Steven Speilberg
If you're an H.G. Wells fan or an S-F afficionado, you will find yourself compelled to shell out the high price to see War of the Worlds on the big screen. The special effects are well worth the cost of the film.
But if you're looking for a script that makes any sense, or characters that you can bear to follow for the whole two hours of the film, or a plot that doesn't tax your intelligence - I have two words for you - STAY AWAY!
I suppose that I could have overlooked those flaws, being an avid science fiction fan and reader since age 4 - except for all the shreiking in the theater....uh, coming from the screen.
Speilberg certainly got lazy with his directing - and his screenplay.
1) Was it really necessary to have Dakota Fanning (as the little daughter) shrieking and whining all the time? That stupid character never shut up. Me, me, me, me, me... She was a spoiled, insensitive, annoying and distracting idiot. What a waste of a perfectly good, young actress.
Besides, let's look at reality, during real danger, even children have the sense to shut up and listen and let their parents guide them. Really bad writing.
Didn't Spielberg trust his film enough to believe we could handle our own screaming?
2) Tim Robbins, as Harlan Ogilvy, was apparently supposed to be playing the Curate character from the book. In the book, the Curate goes mad and never stops babbling or making noise, and endangers their position.
If Tim Robbins was playing insanity... that didn't come through. He just seemed annoying and afraid. Those scenes really could have been directed much better.
Besides, there really wasn't much character development - or perhaps they cut out those scenes?
And Spielberg's writers, Josh Friedman and David Koepp, never explain why, with all the people running down that hill, with the fire licking at their heels, why Tim Robbins ONLY invites Tom Cruise and Dakota Fanning into his little hidey-hole.
3) The ending, the epilogue. This is H.G. Wells' version:
And strangest of all is it to hold my wife's hand again, and to think that I have counted her, and that she has counted me, among the dead.
It's satisfying.
Spielberg's on the other hand...well, I'm not going to tell you his ending. But suffice to say, it makes no sense, considering the overall context.
But, there is one really poignant moment at the end, that is well acted and believable.
And Mariann Mayberry, playing the ex-wife is excellent.
Overall, noisy, noisy, noisy, great effects, poor writing. If I had to rate it, I'd says about 2.5 stars.
Speilberg has done some wonderful, magical, amazing films. This isn't one of them.
Is anyone still writing movies with actual plots?
I don't remember the book being this insipid. Do you?
Not sure? You can read the whole book online!
War of the Worlds, by H.G. Wells
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/www/warworlds/warw.html
(And my octogenarian mother wanted to see this? I can see her now!)
If you'd rather stay home and enjoy your favorite film -
You can download them for a lot less than theatre prices.
Thursday, June 16, 2005
ODE DADDY
Another Father's Day weekend coming up. And me, without a father. Sigh.
Seems I have been fortunate enough to have several mothers over the years. But only one father. And I adored him blindly. Little girls are like that, you know.
Recently, listening to my brothers, I've come to realize that he wasn't the wonderful, warm, cuddly, brilliant, entertaining, adorable daddy I knew. I loved to crawl into his warm, toasty bed on Saturday mornings and have hime tell me stories. He was such an expressive, fun raconteur.
The mind is a fascinating thing. I didn't remember all the fights and arguments and battles the boys had. Or I understood my father's point of view and dismissed them, because he always made perfect sense to me. Even when we totally disagreed, I understood his perspective. The boys, well, they remember him in anger and frustration.
To me, my Daddy lit up the room.
Dad's are interesting. A dear friend whom I adore, told me that he and his son have finally started to hash out their personal animosities. (Or at least his son's.) Knowing him, I couldn't imagine him doing the things his son feels he did or didn't do. Yet, my friend says, his son is right.
Why don't dads get along with their sons?
While I am adamantly not a fan of films and television programs that keep depicting the parents constantly in the wrong; that keep having the parents apologize for everything while their evil spawn wreak havoc all over and just sit back and reap the the praise for being ill-mannered, inconsiderate boors...
sometimes, parents do need to clear the air and apologize.
Dad, how do your children feel about you?
And if it's not great...what are you going to do to change that?
It's time to stop taxing your filial relationships - while you can still save them.
Remember, though, if you're still lucky enough to have parents -
Stop and think.
When they were being parents, they didn't have a manual.
They had to guess and fumble and bumble along - just like you
did when you had your children.
Cut them some slack. Whatever they did, they meant well.
And they didn't know any better. They just did the best they could.
With love to my daddy...wherever he is.
Seems I have been fortunate enough to have several mothers over the years. But only one father. And I adored him blindly. Little girls are like that, you know.
Recently, listening to my brothers, I've come to realize that he wasn't the wonderful, warm, cuddly, brilliant, entertaining, adorable daddy I knew. I loved to crawl into his warm, toasty bed on Saturday mornings and have hime tell me stories. He was such an expressive, fun raconteur.
The mind is a fascinating thing. I didn't remember all the fights and arguments and battles the boys had. Or I understood my father's point of view and dismissed them, because he always made perfect sense to me. Even when we totally disagreed, I understood his perspective. The boys, well, they remember him in anger and frustration.
To me, my Daddy lit up the room.
Dad's are interesting. A dear friend whom I adore, told me that he and his son have finally started to hash out their personal animosities. (Or at least his son's.) Knowing him, I couldn't imagine him doing the things his son feels he did or didn't do. Yet, my friend says, his son is right.
Why don't dads get along with their sons?
While I am adamantly not a fan of films and television programs that keep depicting the parents constantly in the wrong; that keep having the parents apologize for everything while their evil spawn wreak havoc all over and just sit back and reap the the praise for being ill-mannered, inconsiderate boors...
sometimes, parents do need to clear the air and apologize.
Dad, how do your children feel about you?
And if it's not great...what are you going to do to change that?
It's time to stop taxing your filial relationships - while you can still save them.
Remember, though, if you're still lucky enough to have parents -
Stop and think.
When they were being parents, they didn't have a manual.
They had to guess and fumble and bumble along - just like you
did when you had your children.
Cut them some slack. Whatever they did, they meant well.
And they didn't know any better. They just did the best they could.
With love to my daddy...wherever he is.
Tuesday, June 07, 2005
Supreme Court Turns Invalids into Criminals
I dearly hope that none of the august Justices on the Supreme Court ever have to watch someone close them die, slowly, from cancer.
I dearly hope that none of these fine men and women ever have to see someone they love in such intense pain that they beg to die...knowing that they can dial back that pain for their loved one - but they have to withhold the treatment.
Just because the Justice Department is having a hard time fighting illegal drugs is no reason to put so many people into incredible pain and misery.
I have a dear friend who fought cancer, raging through her body, at least three times. The doctors told her, on the first round, that her chances were slim. But she wasn't buying into that nonsense. Marijuana helped her beat the pain of the cancer and the treatments.
It's taken years, cost her everything she had, including a husband,...but, so far, she's in fine shape. And she's helped thousands of others deal with the trauma and pain and shock of the experience as a volunteer counselor and speaker. Today, she does even more good doing fundraising for various charities. Because she lives, she makes the world a better place.
She couldn't have done it if she'd had to endure the pain.
Pain doesn't just hurt the body. It drains the spirit, too.
Do you understand what yesterday's Supreme Court Decision criminalizing medical marijuana users really means?
It's not about the drugs.
It means that the Supreme Court of the United States of America has determined that states don't have the right to pass laws within their own borders. It means that if all the voters of a state pass a law, and the Federal government doesn't agree, they can overrule our rights and make us criminals.
What do you think about the implications of the Supreme Court's decision?
I dearly hope that none of these fine men and women ever have to see someone they love in such intense pain that they beg to die...knowing that they can dial back that pain for their loved one - but they have to withhold the treatment.
Just because the Justice Department is having a hard time fighting illegal drugs is no reason to put so many people into incredible pain and misery.
I have a dear friend who fought cancer, raging through her body, at least three times. The doctors told her, on the first round, that her chances were slim. But she wasn't buying into that nonsense. Marijuana helped her beat the pain of the cancer and the treatments.
It's taken years, cost her everything she had, including a husband,...but, so far, she's in fine shape. And she's helped thousands of others deal with the trauma and pain and shock of the experience as a volunteer counselor and speaker. Today, she does even more good doing fundraising for various charities. Because she lives, she makes the world a better place.
She couldn't have done it if she'd had to endure the pain.
Pain doesn't just hurt the body. It drains the spirit, too.
Do you understand what yesterday's Supreme Court Decision criminalizing medical marijuana users really means?
It's not about the drugs.
It means that the Supreme Court of the United States of America has determined that states don't have the right to pass laws within their own borders. It means that if all the voters of a state pass a law, and the Federal government doesn't agree, they can overrule our rights and make us criminals.
What do you think about the implications of the Supreme Court's decision?
Wednesday, May 11, 2005
Capitol Alert - No Fly Zone
Air Force Master Sgt. Arthur Powell said. "This is one reason the D.C. area should feel secure. It shows we're ready to respond at a moment's notice." This is according to a Scripps Howard news report
Is this the most ridiculous statement you've ever heard?
An LA Times report tells us that the Cessna was spotted and noted at 11:28 a.m., 17 minutes from the White House. Yet, despite no response from the pilot when they tried to raise him on the radio, they didn't scramble jets until 11:55 a.m.
Now, being a TaxMama, I've just got to do the math:
..11:55
- 11:28
---------
27 minutes
Hmmmmmmm...... Let me see if I can figure this out?
The plane was 17 minutes from the White House and they sent jets to intercept it 28 minutes later...so the White House and Capitol were demolished 10 minutes earlier?
Yup! I agree with Master Sgt. Arthur Powell - I feel really safe. Don't you?
But only because I'm 3,000 miles away from Washington, DC or the World Trade Center site.
That's our tax dollars at work!
Your TaxMama
P.S. Incidentally, why is it that not even ONE of the articles covering this even explains why the pilot had his radio off when flying through and around so much restricted air space? Or didn't respond?
I've been in Cessnas and they all have radios - even when you are flying on visual. And flying clubs tend to maintain their equipment. (The last person using the plane always calls in to report any maintenance requirements.)
Is this the most ridiculous statement you've ever heard?
An LA Times report tells us that the Cessna was spotted and noted at 11:28 a.m., 17 minutes from the White House. Yet, despite no response from the pilot when they tried to raise him on the radio, they didn't scramble jets until 11:55 a.m.
Now, being a TaxMama, I've just got to do the math:
..11:55
- 11:28
---------
27 minutes
Hmmmmmmm...... Let me see if I can figure this out?
The plane was 17 minutes from the White House and they sent jets to intercept it 28 minutes later...so the White House and Capitol were demolished 10 minutes earlier?
Yup! I agree with Master Sgt. Arthur Powell - I feel really safe. Don't you?
But only because I'm 3,000 miles away from Washington, DC or the World Trade Center site.
That's our tax dollars at work!
Your TaxMama
P.S. Incidentally, why is it that not even ONE of the articles covering this even explains why the pilot had his radio off when flying through and around so much restricted air space? Or didn't respond?
I've been in Cessnas and they all have radios - even when you are flying on visual. And flying clubs tend to maintain their equipment. (The last person using the plane always calls in to report any maintenance requirements.)
Friday, May 06, 2005
Licensed To Tax
With the new legislation I told you about recently potentially shutting out unlicensed tax preparers, it will be more important than ever for today's taxpreparers to get a credentialed.
(You should see the really nasty letters I got after writing about it - as if _I_ had written the legistlation. Puhleeeze!)
But that means there's a scramble to take the IRS's Enrolled Agent Exam this fall. Studying is going to be harder than ever because, this year, for the first time, there is no cushion. If youdon't pass all 4 exams, you don't get to keep the parts you do pass.
Interestingly enough, this is one of the very fewprofessional credentials you can get that don't require a college degree. And while I don't see a minimum age requirement, no doubt you need to beat least 18 to sit for the exam.
But, beyond that, if you can pass it - you're in business. And talk about the ultimate home-based business!
With today's computers and high-speed hook-ups,and electronic filing, and the wide range of cheap to expensive software available - you can make one heck of a 6-figure living, from your living room or college dorm room.
Oh, did it just occur to you that this might be a great way to work your way through college?
No kidding - it beats waiting table or delivering pizza.
So, if you've been doing bookkeeping, or tax returns or been studying tax or accounting, this could be your ticket.
Today is the last day to save $100 on the registration price. So, take the skills survey after you review what the class offers...and get an invitation with the secret link to your $100 savings. http://irsexam.com/included.php
(You should see the really nasty letters I got after writing about it - as if _I_ had written the legistlation. Puhleeeze!)
But that means there's a scramble to take the IRS's Enrolled Agent Exam this fall. Studying is going to be harder than ever because, this year, for the first time, there is no cushion. If youdon't pass all 4 exams, you don't get to keep the parts you do pass.
Interestingly enough, this is one of the very fewprofessional credentials you can get that don't require a college degree. And while I don't see a minimum age requirement, no doubt you need to beat least 18 to sit for the exam.
But, beyond that, if you can pass it - you're in business. And talk about the ultimate home-based business!
With today's computers and high-speed hook-ups,and electronic filing, and the wide range of cheap to expensive software available - you can make one heck of a 6-figure living, from your living room or college dorm room.
Oh, did it just occur to you that this might be a great way to work your way through college?
No kidding - it beats waiting table or delivering pizza.
So, if you've been doing bookkeeping, or tax returns or been studying tax or accounting, this could be your ticket.
Today is the last day to save $100 on the registration price. So, take the skills survey after you review what the class offers...and get an invitation with the secret link to your $100 savings. http://irsexam.com/included.php
Wednesday, April 06, 2005
Losing it!
Well, finally, after about 7 years, I've seen my assistant nearly lose her temper.
Let me tell you, it takes a lot. She spent this morning being me:
Lulu had to prepare a prior year return, installthe software, trouble shoot it, troubleshoot equipment failures and come out with a gleaming, glowing tax return with all the printing attributes intact.
We had to do a 1999 tax return.
For some reason, with all 5 computers being retained just for the purpose of being able to access really, really old programs (some spelled DOS), we didn't have1999 software on ANY of them.
So, I rooted through all the old discs to find the program we used for 1999. It was TaxWorks. That was the last year - and I'd forgotten just how bad a year that was for software.
We installed it on the computer that had all the other TaxWorks software on it. It blew the monitor.
(OK, so the monitor was already bad and that's why it was sitting there, turned off all this time. It wasn't really the program's fault. But we'd forgotten that monitor wasn't functional.)
This time, instead of me doing it all, Lulu had to take care of switching monitors. Plugging in another monitor helped her avoid having to install the program on another computer. That done. On to the return.
Even with all our access codes intact and entered, the program wouldn't compute the tax return. After trying every-thing, she finally had to break down and call tech support. Listening to all this from my side of the office, I was very pleased with how well the TaxWorks folks treated her, calling at the height of tax season about a 5 year-old program.
I don't know what they did, but she got itworking.
After I put in some review and teaching time, the return was done.
Ah, now to print. First - connect this unused computer to the new network printer, then...Oh yes, another of those bizarre TaxWorks DOS idiosyncracies. You have to load the soft fonts -before every attempt to print.
After a couple of attempts, we got it working. Proofread the return.
Then, just as a last precaution, decided to call the client and ask what address (of his many options) he wanted to use on the return. (I HAD asked him during our meeting, but...) Naturally, it was NOTthe address we had.
Trying to reprint the address pages took another hour of trying to get the fonts to work properly.
After 4 hours...I could finally see some smokecoming from her eyes, hands clenching, teeth grinding. And I felt so good!
See, it's not just all in my mind. It's not just me being a nasty, sour [enter invective here].
Dealing with hardware and software issues all day really does turn the sweetest people into monsters.
Well, almost. She never did lose it.
When she left at 1:15 p.m. Lulu had a sunny smile....
or maybe that's because she was leaving.
[Note: Tax Pros I've heard from who are using TaxWorks these days are loving it. ]
Let me tell you, it takes a lot. She spent this morning being me:
Lulu had to prepare a prior year return, installthe software, trouble shoot it, troubleshoot equipment failures and come out with a gleaming, glowing tax return with all the printing attributes intact.
We had to do a 1999 tax return.
For some reason, with all 5 computers being retained just for the purpose of being able to access really, really old programs (some spelled DOS), we didn't have1999 software on ANY of them.
So, I rooted through all the old discs to find the program we used for 1999. It was TaxWorks. That was the last year - and I'd forgotten just how bad a year that was for software.
We installed it on the computer that had all the other TaxWorks software on it. It blew the monitor.
(OK, so the monitor was already bad and that's why it was sitting there, turned off all this time. It wasn't really the program's fault. But we'd forgotten that monitor wasn't functional.)
This time, instead of me doing it all, Lulu had to take care of switching monitors. Plugging in another monitor helped her avoid having to install the program on another computer. That done. On to the return.
Even with all our access codes intact and entered, the program wouldn't compute the tax return. After trying every-thing, she finally had to break down and call tech support. Listening to all this from my side of the office, I was very pleased with how well the TaxWorks folks treated her, calling at the height of tax season about a 5 year-old program.
I don't know what they did, but she got itworking.
After I put in some review and teaching time, the return was done.
Ah, now to print. First - connect this unused computer to the new network printer, then...Oh yes, another of those bizarre TaxWorks DOS idiosyncracies. You have to load the soft fonts -before every attempt to print.
After a couple of attempts, we got it working. Proofread the return.
Then, just as a last precaution, decided to call the client and ask what address (of his many options) he wanted to use on the return. (I HAD asked him during our meeting, but...) Naturally, it was NOTthe address we had.
Trying to reprint the address pages took another hour of trying to get the fonts to work properly.
After 4 hours...I could finally see some smokecoming from her eyes, hands clenching, teeth grinding. And I felt so good!
See, it's not just all in my mind. It's not just me being a nasty, sour [enter invective here].
Dealing with hardware and software issues all day really does turn the sweetest people into monsters.
Well, almost. She never did lose it.
When she left at 1:15 p.m. Lulu had a sunny smile....
or maybe that's because she was leaving.
[Note: Tax Pros I've heard from who are using TaxWorks these days are loving it. ]
Monday, March 28, 2005
Boring Things That Change Your Life
This morning, in an e-mail, a friend complainedabout doing something very boooooooorrrriiiing.
And it started a train of thought that sent me all the way back to this class I took in college that I expected to be totally uninformative. But I was curious.
It was a class in Judaism.
Now, you have to understand, by that point in mylife I had spent nearly 18 years in Jewish schools,from the age of 2 in nursery - to Yeshiva University,while I was still in high school. So, I knew the class would be boring. But I wanted to know how auniversity, in a secular environment, would teach acourse like this.
And, I'll admit, the class was nearly as boring asI might have expected - except for the teacher.You couldn't help being charmed by Rabbi Bergman. He fascinated me. He was the first rabbi I'd evermet who didn't have an eastern European, Yiddishaccent. He spoke American like a native. And he had street smarts. But more than that - he had warmth - and made us all welcome.
But that wasn't what caused my life to change. It was just the first part of a chain of events.
The following year, I took another class I thoughtwould be boring - one of those fillers to meet arequirement - sociology. [yaaaaawwwn]
I that class there was this loud, middle-agedwoman with a screechy voice and lots of opinions. She was always the first to stand up and speak out on any topic - usually with a controversial opinion. Mesmerizing, though. She looked like someone's mom - and was.
She turned out to be Rabbi Bergman's wife. And we hit it off immediately, because, having met him gave me an excuse to engage her in conversation. (You have NO idea how shy I am, and how rare it is for me to start a conversation with somone.) But, with Pnina, I could, because of the previous connection.
Aside from welcoming me into their family, they got me THE job in a national CPA firm [Ernst & Ernst] that started me onmy way to learn about income taxes.
So, sitting in on that first boring class started achain of events, leading me to meet you!
Next time you have to do something you're reluctantto do, look upon it as an adventure. Just watch what fun it bring you - in the long run!
Best wishes
Eva Rosenberg
Your TaxMama
And it started a train of thought that sent me all the way back to this class I took in college that I expected to be totally uninformative. But I was curious.
It was a class in Judaism.
Now, you have to understand, by that point in mylife I had spent nearly 18 years in Jewish schools,from the age of 2 in nursery - to Yeshiva University,while I was still in high school. So, I knew the class would be boring. But I wanted to know how auniversity, in a secular environment, would teach acourse like this.
And, I'll admit, the class was nearly as boring asI might have expected - except for the teacher.You couldn't help being charmed by Rabbi Bergman. He fascinated me. He was the first rabbi I'd evermet who didn't have an eastern European, Yiddishaccent. He spoke American like a native. And he had street smarts. But more than that - he had warmth - and made us all welcome.
But that wasn't what caused my life to change. It was just the first part of a chain of events.
The following year, I took another class I thoughtwould be boring - one of those fillers to meet arequirement - sociology. [yaaaaawwwn]
I that class there was this loud, middle-agedwoman with a screechy voice and lots of opinions. She was always the first to stand up and speak out on any topic - usually with a controversial opinion. Mesmerizing, though. She looked like someone's mom - and was.
She turned out to be Rabbi Bergman's wife. And we hit it off immediately, because, having met him gave me an excuse to engage her in conversation. (You have NO idea how shy I am, and how rare it is for me to start a conversation with somone.) But, with Pnina, I could, because of the previous connection.
Aside from welcoming me into their family, they got me THE job in a national CPA firm [Ernst & Ernst] that started me onmy way to learn about income taxes.
So, sitting in on that first boring class started achain of events, leading me to meet you!
Next time you have to do something you're reluctantto do, look upon it as an adventure. Just watch what fun it bring you - in the long run!
Best wishes
Eva Rosenberg
Your TaxMama
Wednesday, March 09, 2005
The Most Overlooked Resource By Small Businesses Today
Let's face it, we know that money in a small business is usually tight. We're always scrambling to pay bills, often at the last minute. Oh sure, we usually get them paid on time, or just under the wire...
But that often means running around to post offices just before they close so we can get things postmarked. Or, often, when it comes to taxes, having to pay extra for proof of delivery so we can avoid penalties.
Or, to ensure that you meet a payment deadline, you use one of the online tax payment services, like OfficialPayments.com - which charge you a charming"convenience fee" of 2% or more of your payment.
OR, you end up missing the deadline and paying late fees to IRS. Some of those can be pretty costly. (On late payroll deposits - it's 10$!)
Is this really the best use of your time and your money?
Heck no!
You can save all that time and money by simply joining IRS's Electronic Federal Tax Payment System (EFTPS)
Using this system, you can transfer money from your bank account at the last minute to pay your payroll taxes.
You won't have to run to the bank.
You won't have to pay for overnight shipping.
You won't have to pay extra to get a receipt.
You simply initiate the payment the day before the tax is due. You get a time-stamped receipt, in effect, based on the electronic date and time of your transaction. It's called an EFT Acknowledgement Number.
Another benefit I think you'll like. For those of you who have a tendency to forget what taxes you paid, or you know the date and amount, but didn't note the year or type of tax....all you have to do is log into your account and, voila! The data is right there.
Didn't bring the information to your tax pro's office? No prob. Just log in from his or her office. The information is at your fingertips. Kind of fun, actually. It's like having POWER!
And you've incurred no fees. No "convenience fees", no wire transfer fees. And no extra staff time costs to run to the post office, and risk a traffic accident or...
You can pay any of your business taxes.
In fact you can use EFTPS to make your quarterly estimated payments. You can schedule all of them for the whole year. But, what's if, when that day comes you don't have the money? Or you're income is down, and your estimated payments should be smaller? Just log in 48 hours before the payment is due - and cancel it - or change it. Simple.
Anyone can sign up. You don't have to be a business.
Frankly, I don't see any reason to be running up"convenience fees" on credit cards. They're not really convenient. In fact, they're a waste of money.
If you're in business and have to pay payroll taxes, corporate taxes or self-employment taxes - sign up today.
If you're not in business, but have to make estimated payments on your investment income, or have prior year taxes to pay, or regularly get notices about adjustments, changes or corrections to your account, set a personal EFTPS account. IRS will welcome you.
Don't worry about this being part of IRS's system. It's not a sinister thing. As Martha would say,"It's a good thing."
But that often means running around to post offices just before they close so we can get things postmarked. Or, often, when it comes to taxes, having to pay extra for proof of delivery so we can avoid penalties.
Or, to ensure that you meet a payment deadline, you use one of the online tax payment services, like OfficialPayments.com - which charge you a charming"convenience fee" of 2% or more of your payment.
OR, you end up missing the deadline and paying late fees to IRS. Some of those can be pretty costly. (On late payroll deposits - it's 10$!)
Is this really the best use of your time and your money?
Heck no!
You can save all that time and money by simply joining IRS's Electronic Federal Tax Payment System (EFTPS)
Using this system, you can transfer money from your bank account at the last minute to pay your payroll taxes.
You won't have to run to the bank.
You won't have to pay for overnight shipping.
You won't have to pay extra to get a receipt.
You simply initiate the payment the day before the tax is due. You get a time-stamped receipt, in effect, based on the electronic date and time of your transaction. It's called an EFT Acknowledgement Number.
Another benefit I think you'll like. For those of you who have a tendency to forget what taxes you paid, or you know the date and amount, but didn't note the year or type of tax....all you have to do is log into your account and, voila! The data is right there.
Didn't bring the information to your tax pro's office? No prob. Just log in from his or her office. The information is at your fingertips. Kind of fun, actually. It's like having POWER!
And you've incurred no fees. No "convenience fees", no wire transfer fees. And no extra staff time costs to run to the post office, and risk a traffic accident or...
You can pay any of your business taxes.
In fact you can use EFTPS to make your quarterly estimated payments. You can schedule all of them for the whole year. But, what's if, when that day comes you don't have the money? Or you're income is down, and your estimated payments should be smaller? Just log in 48 hours before the payment is due - and cancel it - or change it. Simple.
Anyone can sign up. You don't have to be a business.
Frankly, I don't see any reason to be running up"convenience fees" on credit cards. They're not really convenient. In fact, they're a waste of money.
If you're in business and have to pay payroll taxes, corporate taxes or self-employment taxes - sign up today.
If you're not in business, but have to make estimated payments on your investment income, or have prior year taxes to pay, or regularly get notices about adjustments, changes or corrections to your account, set a personal EFTPS account. IRS will welcome you.
Don't worry about this being part of IRS's system. It's not a sinister thing. As Martha would say,"It's a good thing."
[BONUS: Tim Winship at frequentflier.com tells me that some debit cards or
related bank accounts, will pay you bonus points or miles when you use them. He can tell you which ones.
Thursday, March 03, 2005
Elect the West Wing Writing Team
Did you see this week's West Wing?
(Come on my friends,you must - you'll be tested on it each Friday.)
The writers were amazing.
(Credits show Debora Cahn, Mark Goffman and Josh Singer who are finally doing a strong job replacing Aaron Sorkin.)
Seriously, though, they tackled children's rights and lowering the voting age.
They tackled the games lawmakers must play to get a chance to vote -
when the opposing party (or Speaker of the House doesn't want an issue addressed).
They got into an open discussion about stem cell research (though, they left out a discussion of the alternative, non-threatening sources of stem cells, like dental areas - the roots of teeth).
They even got into a discussion about a ridiculous fight between hunters from Montana and Canadian law enforcement. They showed just how such childish behaviour could escalate into war - if you let it.
The point is - you don't need to agree with any point of view. But they provide so much great material to think about, or to start a conversation about.
Heck, if you can't find a way to start chatting at a party...try bringing up the West Wing.
To read about the topics:
http://www.nbc.com/nbc/The_West_Wing/hot_topics/index.shtml
I am loving the ideas and insights they bring into my home.
(Except for the stuff with Mako -I mean, what, taking a terrific, interesting guy likethat and giving him and Martin Sheen such wimpy scenes together. What is this - Will and Grace? Not only is it unbecoming for a president to whine about a co-winner of the Nobel Prize, it's so silly. For heaven's sake - that was a weak story line. I am a long-time Mako fan - and didn't enjoy either him or Martin Sheen in that segment - and learned nothing about the Nobel Prize.)
(Come on my friends,you must - you'll be tested on it each Friday.)
The writers were amazing.
(Credits show Debora Cahn, Mark Goffman and Josh Singer who are finally doing a strong job replacing Aaron Sorkin.)
Seriously, though, they tackled children's rights and lowering the voting age.
They tackled the games lawmakers must play to get a chance to vote -
when the opposing party (or Speaker of the House doesn't want an issue addressed).
They got into an open discussion about stem cell research (though, they left out a discussion of the alternative, non-threatening sources of stem cells, like dental areas - the roots of teeth).
They even got into a discussion about a ridiculous fight between hunters from Montana and Canadian law enforcement. They showed just how such childish behaviour could escalate into war - if you let it.
The point is - you don't need to agree with any point of view. But they provide so much great material to think about, or to start a conversation about.
Heck, if you can't find a way to start chatting at a party...try bringing up the West Wing.
To read about the topics:
http://www.nbc.com/nbc/The_West_Wing/hot_topics/index.shtml
I am loving the ideas and insights they bring into my home.
(Except for the stuff with Mako -I mean, what, taking a terrific, interesting guy likethat and giving him and Martin Sheen such wimpy scenes together. What is this - Will and Grace? Not only is it unbecoming for a president to whine about a co-winner of the Nobel Prize, it's so silly. For heaven's sake - that was a weak story line. I am a long-time Mako fan - and didn't enjoy either him or Martin Sheen in that segment - and learned nothing about the Nobel Prize.)
Monday, February 07, 2005
An Open Letter to President Bush
This was sent to President George Bush at
president@whitehouse.gov on February 7, 2005.
You are welcome to copy this letter, and modify
it to express your opinions or ideas and send
it along to the President and/or to any member of
the Legislature. You'll find links at the bottom.
Dear President Bush,
I must say that I really admire your bold and strong
push to fix the Social Security problem. No president
has really taken that on as a major campaign, that I
can remember.
But, may I respectfully object to the direction you
want to take this - using privatized accounts.
And then may I provide an alternative solution?
Why is this not a good idea? Here are 5 reasons:
1) The amount of money going into the accounts will
generate negligible earnings for the average worker.
Even for someone earning $50,000 per year, the
personal portion will not add more than about $50
per month to their SS check, after 20 years of investment.
2) The money that goes into the private accounts
simply reduces the eventual benefit taxpayers will
receive from the SSA.
3) The people who will benefit the most from this are
the people who won't be living on Social Security. They
are the people who are sophisticated enough to work
the market - and their own investments and savings
are doing well. SS income will play a small part in their
retirement budget.
4) The people who will primarily be living on Social
Security checks don't have the time or expertise to
manage those accounts effectively. Most don't even
have investment accounts presently. And the ones that
do - well, most have lost much of their capital during the
boom, then bust years. Some are finally recouping
and getting even with their IRA contributions after 5 years.
5) The small amounts that go into these accounts each
year are too small for the investment banking industry to
really administer cost-effectively. Even now, IRAs and KEOGHs,
etc. with under $1,000 are not permitted to be invested in
mutual funds or stocks by the banking houses. The sums
are too little - the relative costs, too high.
An alternative to private accounts - that will cut the out
flow from the Social Security fund:
Consider looking at all the things that the Social Security
trust fund is used to support. Do a solid analysis of the various
expenses that drain that fund.
For instance, a big drain is money going to children. Did you realize
that when someone dies, their children are able to collect from
Social Security until they are age 18, or even up to 24, as long
as they are students.?
This is a wonderful boon for many college-bound youths. It's like
getting an instant scholarship. In fact, my brother used this
source of support to get through UCLA after my father died.
So, I know how just how valuable this can be.
But, seriously, friends, why are we paying children out of
Social Security?
Shouldn't that money come from some other source?
If we continue to pay children, can you imagine how much we
could cut the drain on Social Security if we just changed ONE thing -
limit the support payments to age 18, or whenever they complete
high school.
Perhaps the support could continue for another two years after
high school - not for college per se, but to cover some vocational
training that would give the child a marketable skill so they could
earn enough, working part-time, to get themselves through college.
You made an excellent point about education and training
in your State of the Union message.
And if you ever watch the West Wing, you see the writers promoting
a candidate, Jimmy Smits, who is promoting a much longer school year.
Granted, I think 249 days is quite excessive. But I also see that children
don't spend nearly enough hours per day in public schools.
They have far too much time off, to be latchkey kids or to be pushed
into joining gangs. That time, an extra hour or two in school can be
used for vocational training or working internships - that could result
in either corporate scholarships, or a means to earn their way through
college.
And keep them occupied long enough to stay out of trouble.
If you've ever looked at the private school and religious school
systems, all those children stay in school until 4:00 or 5:00 p.m.
without too much suffering. And you do see the lower rates of
criminality among these kids who get home around the time
their parents get home from work.
While this might cost more to the school systems, it would save
millions in welfare and other social service and prison costs.
Someone needs to look at the overall savings - not just the increase
to one entity's budget.
Please, do take my suggestions into account when you work to
improve our financial welfare. You're in a position to do a lot of
good. And it does appear that you're making a good faith effort
to do exactly that.
This would be such a powerful legacy that, historically, it would
overshadow any controversy you've generated due to America's
military activities.
Sincerely,
Eva Rosenberg, Enrolled Agent
TaxMama.com
To send this letter to your Legislators,
please feel free to use the links here:
http://taxmama.com/Articles/calltoaction.html
Thursday, February 03, 2005
President Bush and Social Security
Yesterday, President Bush presented his State of the Union message to repeated applause, purple fingers, and some boos.
One of the things he postulated was allowing us to set aside a portion of our Social Security tax contribution and investing it ourselves. His vision is to have the money invested in extremely conservative securities - bonds, or very safe stocks.
But President Bush didn't mention any provisions to absolutely prohibit you from using the money in that account. PERIOD. NO WITHDRAWALS.
But if this is to replace part of SS, it should be untouchable until you are eligible to collect Social Security.
Shall we see how much we could earn if we did that?
Let's look at someone who earns an average of $50,000 per year for the next 20 years. We'll call her Sarah. At today's contribution percentage (which Bush said he didn't want to raise), Sarah's annual Social Security contribution would be $3,100 (6.2% x 50,000).
Let's say that she is permitted to set aside 10% of her Social Security contribution. That would give her the whopping sum of $310 per year!
[I had a small amount like that in a client's IRA account - and the bank wouldn't let him move that from the Money Market account into ANY stocks or mutual funds. It was too small for them to bother with.]
But, let's say, under Bush's program, the investment houses are mandated to accept these minute sums. And they have been warned that their fees must be severely curtailed.
So, let's be optimistic and say, that on the average, over the next 20 years Sarah will earn 5% each year, after fees. [To see a really good analysis and explanation of the different plans on the table, read Andrea Coombes article]
Do you want to know how much money would be earned after putting $310 into the account for TWENTY years and earning 5%?
About $10,250.
Now, let's suppose this is your account. With that enormous sum earned in 20 years, in addition to your Social Security benefit, you'll get about and extra $42 per month...assumining you're still earning 5%. Double that if interest rates have reached 10%.
So this risky social experiment, if you follow the guidelines, you're apt to supplement your Social Security benefits by, maybe, just maybe, as much as a $100 per month.
But you will lose a similar amount because of the 10% you didn't contribute each year, so you'll be about even - except that you spent the last 20 years straining your mind, managing the account. Some few people will do a little bit better. But the average person is apt to do a little worse.
This seems like a waste of energy to me.
In fact, Janet Haynes sent a link to this New York Times article about what happened to the good people in Chile who instituted a similar plan about 25 years ago in the administration of Gen. Augusto Pinochet - The title of the article tells you how well it worked: Chile's Retirees Find Shortfall in Private Plan. Read it. You'll be fascinated.
BETTER OPTIONS
Child Support
What about looking at all the things that the Social Security trust fund is used to pay for. I'd love to see our Congressional analysts or watchdogs, do a solid analysis of the various drains on that fund.
For instance, a big drain is money going to children. Did you know that when someone dies, their children are able to collect from Social Security until they are age 18, or even up to 24, as long as they are students.?
This is a wonderful boon for many college-bound youths. It's like getting an instant scholarship. In fact, my brother used this source of support to get through UCLA after my father died. So, I know how just how valuable this can be.
But, seriously, friends, why are we paying children out of Social Security?
Shouldn't that money come from some other source?
If we continue to pay children, can you imagine how much we could cut the drain on Social Security if we just changed ONE thing - limit the support payments to age 18, or whenever they complete high school.
Training
Perhaps we could extend the support for another two years - not for college per se, but to cover some vocational training that would give the child a marketable skill so they could earn enough, working part-time, to get themselves through college.
Heck, why don't high schools provide the training? Why is that kids are getting out of high school and don't have the skills to get a decent paying part-time job? There are so many ways for a student to earn money. And today, with the Internet, people with strong Internet literacy are in strong demand - if only for data entry or site updates. Students could even do that from home.
With the proper skills, they could learn to work on cars, do plumbing or electrical work, or handyman work, or work in labs, or in offices, or hospitals desperately need good people... Businesses could get away with paying the students a bit less because they aren't quite as experienced and can't work full-time. But the kids could earn enough to get their educations AND learn a little bit about how the world works, outside the shelter of the university.
It won't hurt as much as you might think.
I know what it's like to be that age. You want to get all the growing up and educating out of the way so you can start your real life. It's so exciting. You're so exhilirated with all the opportunities you know you're going to have. To have to set your real education aside for a year or so, or to make it all take longer because you have to pay for it yourself... that hurts so much you can hardly breathe. But you do. Many of us did.
And we took it in stride. We never even thought of it as a hardship. There's a whole other world in college when you're a night student. Your instructors tend to teach you with more respect because you have a better understanding of the world. Your classmates are all in the same boat you are, some even juggling families - so you never feel any different. In fact, you can make some pretty good, lifelong friends. (I did that, too.) And you can have fun!
Talk About Win-Win
Let's face it, you have your own spending money, because you're earning it. You don't have to answer to anyone for it. You don't have to work for years, or decades to pay back the grants or student loans. So you'll never have to default. Just think what this does to your credit!
Not only would this relieve the Social Security fund of a substantial burden (4-6 years of child support), but we might be able to keep more support jobs in this country because there will be someone to fill them. AND we'd groom a new generation of adults who'd be apt to understand money and responsbility better than they do today.
---
I'd love to see your views on how to fix Social Security without raising taxes unduly, or cutting benefits for retirees. Please, your comments are very welcome. In fact, I'll try to collect them and pass them on for you.
Of course...if you'd like to make your voice heard directly, please feel free to contact your legislators and executives directly. Here are links to their e-mail and snail mail addresses:
TaxMama's Call to Action Page
One of the things he postulated was allowing us to set aside a portion of our Social Security tax contribution and investing it ourselves. His vision is to have the money invested in extremely conservative securities - bonds, or very safe stocks.
But President Bush didn't mention any provisions to absolutely prohibit you from using the money in that account. PERIOD. NO WITHDRAWALS.
But if this is to replace part of SS, it should be untouchable until you are eligible to collect Social Security.
Shall we see how much we could earn if we did that?
Let's look at someone who earns an average of $50,000 per year for the next 20 years. We'll call her Sarah. At today's contribution percentage (which Bush said he didn't want to raise), Sarah's annual Social Security contribution would be $3,100 (6.2% x 50,000).
Let's say that she is permitted to set aside 10% of her Social Security contribution. That would give her the whopping sum of $310 per year!
[I had a small amount like that in a client's IRA account - and the bank wouldn't let him move that from the Money Market account into ANY stocks or mutual funds. It was too small for them to bother with.]
But, let's say, under Bush's program, the investment houses are mandated to accept these minute sums. And they have been warned that their fees must be severely curtailed.
So, let's be optimistic and say, that on the average, over the next 20 years Sarah will earn 5% each year, after fees. [To see a really good analysis and explanation of the different plans on the table, read Andrea Coombes article]
Do you want to know how much money would be earned after putting $310 into the account for TWENTY years and earning 5%?
About $10,250.
Now, let's suppose this is your account. With that enormous sum earned in 20 years, in addition to your Social Security benefit, you'll get about and extra $42 per month...assumining you're still earning 5%. Double that if interest rates have reached 10%.
So this risky social experiment, if you follow the guidelines, you're apt to supplement your Social Security benefits by, maybe, just maybe, as much as a $100 per month.
But you will lose a similar amount because of the 10% you didn't contribute each year, so you'll be about even - except that you spent the last 20 years straining your mind, managing the account. Some few people will do a little bit better. But the average person is apt to do a little worse.
This seems like a waste of energy to me.
In fact, Janet Haynes sent a link to this New York Times article about what happened to the good people in Chile who instituted a similar plan about 25 years ago in the administration of Gen. Augusto Pinochet - The title of the article tells you how well it worked: Chile's Retirees Find Shortfall in Private Plan. Read it. You'll be fascinated.
BETTER OPTIONS
Child Support
What about looking at all the things that the Social Security trust fund is used to pay for. I'd love to see our Congressional analysts or watchdogs, do a solid analysis of the various drains on that fund.
For instance, a big drain is money going to children. Did you know that when someone dies, their children are able to collect from Social Security until they are age 18, or even up to 24, as long as they are students.?
This is a wonderful boon for many college-bound youths. It's like getting an instant scholarship. In fact, my brother used this source of support to get through UCLA after my father died. So, I know how just how valuable this can be.
But, seriously, friends, why are we paying children out of Social Security?
Shouldn't that money come from some other source?
If we continue to pay children, can you imagine how much we could cut the drain on Social Security if we just changed ONE thing - limit the support payments to age 18, or whenever they complete high school.
Training
Perhaps we could extend the support for another two years - not for college per se, but to cover some vocational training that would give the child a marketable skill so they could earn enough, working part-time, to get themselves through college.
Heck, why don't high schools provide the training? Why is that kids are getting out of high school and don't have the skills to get a decent paying part-time job? There are so many ways for a student to earn money. And today, with the Internet, people with strong Internet literacy are in strong demand - if only for data entry or site updates. Students could even do that from home.
[Heck, I live about two blocks from a major State University and can't find a student in that whole computer department who can do work on an Internet site that meets the level of some of the 10 year olds's sites I've seen. OK, I'm not asking for elaborate - but at least proofread your showcase site to make sure all your links work and the graphics are clean...sheesh]
Let's look at that old concept:
Don't just give them the fish so they can feed themselves today.
Teach them to fish so they can feed themselves forever.
Students Can Do it On Their Own!
With the proper skills, they could learn to work on cars, do plumbing or electrical work, or handyman work, or work in labs, or in offices, or hospitals desperately need good people... Businesses could get away with paying the students a bit less because they aren't quite as experienced and can't work full-time. But the kids could earn enough to get their educations AND learn a little bit about how the world works, outside the shelter of the university.
It won't hurt as much as you might think.
I know what it's like to be that age. You want to get all the growing up and educating out of the way so you can start your real life. It's so exciting. You're so exhilirated with all the opportunities you know you're going to have. To have to set your real education aside for a year or so, or to make it all take longer because you have to pay for it yourself... that hurts so much you can hardly breathe. But you do. Many of us did.
And we took it in stride. We never even thought of it as a hardship. There's a whole other world in college when you're a night student. Your instructors tend to teach you with more respect because you have a better understanding of the world. Your classmates are all in the same boat you are, some even juggling families - so you never feel any different. In fact, you can make some pretty good, lifelong friends. (I did that, too.) And you can have fun!
Talk About Win-Win
Let's face it, you have your own spending money, because you're earning it. You don't have to answer to anyone for it. You don't have to work for years, or decades to pay back the grants or student loans. So you'll never have to default. Just think what this does to your credit!
Not only would this relieve the Social Security fund of a substantial burden (4-6 years of child support), but we might be able to keep more support jobs in this country because there will be someone to fill them. AND we'd groom a new generation of adults who'd be apt to understand money and responsbility better than they do today.
---
I'd love to see your views on how to fix Social Security without raising taxes unduly, or cutting benefits for retirees. Please, your comments are very welcome. In fact, I'll try to collect them and pass them on for you.
Of course...if you'd like to make your voice heard directly, please feel free to contact your legislators and executives directly. Here are links to their e-mail and snail mail addresses:
TaxMama's Call to Action Page
Friday, January 28, 2005
Tsunami Relief and the Red Cross
Last weekend, I went to the Castaic Community AwardsBanquet, where my friend, Tax Angel, Rita Veen, EA was being re-installed as a director of the Chamber of Commerce.
Mike Antonovich, the Supervisor of the LA CountyBoard of Supervisors spoke to us, in the course of installing the officers and honoring some of thespecial people in the community. He talked about the damage caused by the recent storms in California. We all know that many people's homes were severlydamaged. Many dozens of families camped out in a community center and a church for days. And they now need housing and transitional help until they can get back into their homes or replace them.
What disturbed me about Antonovich's comments is his statement that the Red Cross refused to provide anyhelp or support whatsoever. Despite the fact that many people in this community have always helped theRed Cross, with money and blood, when they needed help, the Red Cross turned their back on the community.
This isn't the first time I've heard this. This is now the third time, that in a state of emergency, I have learned that the Red Cross refused aid. My husband told me that Red Cross did this in his community many years ago. They didn't exactly refuse aid - the Red Cross CHARGED the victims for all the supplies and help! Talk about appalling!
A journalist I spoke to this week confirm this behavior. He said that when he was in the military, the Red Cross brought donuts to the troops - then charged them for the donuts!
In Castaic, the churches helped out and raised money and found homes for these people. In Chico, years ago, the same thing had to happen.
It seems that the Red Cross doesn't really behave likea charity, at least not in this country. They charge for their CPR books and courses, the blood they provide, the supplies and aid they give...sounds more like a business to me. And folks, I donate funds to a business that masquerades as a charity.
So, if you're wondering why I've removed the Red CrossTsunami contribution link...that's why.
However, any contributions you DO make before the end of this month can still be deducted on your 2004 taxreturn. So if you need to cut your taxes for last year and want to help people...please contribute NOW.
Last weekend, I went to the Castaic Community AwardsBanquet, where my friend, Tax Angel, Rita Veen, EA was being re-installed as a director of the Chamber of Commerce.
Mike Antonovich, the Supervisor of the LA CountyBoard of Supervisors spoke to us, in the course of installing the officers and honoring some of thespecial people in the community. He talked about the damage caused by the recent storms in California. We all know that many people's homes were severlydamaged. Many dozens of families camped out in a community center and a church for days. And they now need housing and transitional help until they can get back into their homes or replace them.
What disturbed me about Antonovich's comments is his statement that the Red Cross refused to provide anyhelp or support whatsoever. Despite the fact that many people in this community have always helped theRed Cross, with money and blood, when they needed help, the Red Cross turned their back on the community.
This isn't the first time I've heard this. This is now the third time, that in a state of emergency, I have learned that the Red Cross refused aid. My husband told me that Red Cross did this in his community many years ago. They didn't exactly refuse aid - the Red Cross CHARGED the victims for all the supplies and help! Talk about appalling!
A journalist I spoke to this week confirm this behavior. He said that when he was in the military, the Red Cross brought donuts to the troops - then charged them for the donuts!
In Castaic, the churches helped out and raised money and found homes for these people. In Chico, years ago, the same thing had to happen.
It seems that the Red Cross doesn't really behave likea charity, at least not in this country. They charge for their CPR books and courses, the blood they provide, the supplies and aid they give...sounds more like a business to me. And folks, I donate funds to a business that masquerades as a charity.
So, if you're wondering why I've removed the Red CrossTsunami contribution link...that's why.
However, any contributions you DO make before the end of this month can still be deducted on your 2004 taxreturn. So if you need to cut your taxes for last year and want to help people...please contribute NOW.
Friday, January 14, 2005
Get a Clue Time
Speaking of the floods and landslides in California and elsewhere in the USA this winter, many people have faced inconsolable tragedies - lost loved onesand lost or destroyed homes.
While my heart goes out to you - I am also furiouswith you for putting yourselves into that position.
On the news, I hear nany people screaming that they warned their local or state government about these dangers near their homes. I saw one group, in La Conchita, yelling at Governor Arnold, blaming him for not having shored up the hillside above their homes.
Hey folks, wake up!
If you can't get any insurance coverage from any carrier AND you can't get any lenders to lend you money against those homes - doesn't that tell you it's too dangerous to live there?
It's not the government's responsibility to support your decision to live in a dangerous area. It's not up to your fellow taxpayers around the state or country to help fund your right to live in a lovely, but dangerous place,next to the ocean, that many taxpayers can't even afford to visit.
If you want to live in places like that - it's up to YOU and the members of YOUR community tofind or raise the funds to make it safe.
Why I am so furious with people like this?
It's not just the financial cost.
It's the fact that their decision has cost the lives of people they love.
Those deaths could have been prevented.
It was a choice.
Isn't it time to take responsibility for ourown actions? And to prevent needless deaths?
With love,
Your TaxMom.
Speaking of the floods and landslides in California and elsewhere in the USA this winter, many people have faced inconsolable tragedies - lost loved onesand lost or destroyed homes.
While my heart goes out to you - I am also furiouswith you for putting yourselves into that position.
On the news, I hear nany people screaming that they warned their local or state government about these dangers near their homes. I saw one group, in La Conchita, yelling at Governor Arnold, blaming him for not having shored up the hillside above their homes.
Hey folks, wake up!
If you can't get any insurance coverage from any carrier AND you can't get any lenders to lend you money against those homes - doesn't that tell you it's too dangerous to live there?
It's not the government's responsibility to support your decision to live in a dangerous area. It's not up to your fellow taxpayers around the state or country to help fund your right to live in a lovely, but dangerous place,next to the ocean, that many taxpayers can't even afford to visit.
If you want to live in places like that - it's up to YOU and the members of YOUR community tofind or raise the funds to make it safe.
Why I am so furious with people like this?
It's not just the financial cost.
It's the fact that their decision has cost the lives of people they love.
Those deaths could have been prevented.
It was a choice.
Isn't it time to take responsibility for ourown actions? And to prevent needless deaths?
With love,
Your TaxMom.
Tuesday, July 20, 2004
Politics, As Usual
Recently, in a CBS.MarketWatch.com article I wrote, I made an error. Apparently, it was a big one. I mistakenly blamed IRS for press release issued by the U.S. Treasury Department.
April 9, 2004 U.S. Treasury Department Press release, ironically numbered JS-1313.
http://www.ustreas.gov/press/releases/js1313.htm
The press release contained this footnote:
America has a choice: It can continue to grow the economy and create new jobs as the President's policies are doing; or it can raise taxes on American families and small businesses, hurting economic recovery and future job creation
I was under the assumption that the US Treasury Department issues press releases for IRS - since so many of them are about taxes. Apparently not. IRS does their own press releases. And they don't include political statements on them.
IRS already has a bad enough rap - they don't need me to blame them for something they didn't do. I really should have checked my facts better. In fact, my editor did ask me about it - and I told him the Treasury issued releases for IRS. So wrong. I really must check my facts better.
It seems, even though we removed the error from my article as soon as we learned of the error, other major national publications ran with the story.
So, world, please accept my apologies.
However, that doesn't change the fact that an agency of the United States government included such a partisan statement. That brings up some questions
1) Should the US Treasury Department be including that kind of political statement with their press releases?
2) Was it a political statement, or just support for the country's head of state?
3) Who in their right mind would number a press release 1313 and not expect bad luck to follow?
Let's start with the second question:
2) Was it a political statement, or just support for the country's head of state?
Let's examine the statement more closely, shall we?
America has a choice: It can continue to grow the economy and create new jobs as the President's policies are doing; or it can raise taxes on American families and small businesses, hurting economic recovery and future job creation
Yup. It's definitely political. Without question, it's a swipe at the Democratic campaign.
Ironically enough, the economy grew dramatically under a Democratic president, Bill Clinton, and collapsed immediately after George Bush's shockingly pessimistic inaugural speech. Talk about a self-fulfilling prophecy - he said the economy would be getting worse - and precipitated one of the biggest slumps in stock market history.
I remember hearing his speech and being shocked. Immediately, I thought, oh no! People will act on this. Why did he need to say that? At his inauguration.
For Treasury to be simply supportive of the administration, the press release should have read more like:
America continues to grow the economy and create new jobs as the President's policies are taking effect.
But if it said that,...there would have been no reason to include it with the press release.
There's no reason why the US Treasury, or any department of the government can't support the policies of the admintration. In fact, they should, that's their job.
But, let's go back to the first question:
1) Should the US Treasury Department be including that kind of political statement with their press releases?
Absolutely not.
This is one of the things I find amazing about our politics. Why don't our elected officials understand?
When you are running for office, sure, you are a member of a party.
But once you get elected, you represent ALL your constituents.
You are supposed to look after the interests of all the people in your district, state, or area.
Your mandate is the good of the country - not your party.
I find it so frustrating that in all communications, on the House and Senate floor, in the media, in news articles, all legistlators are referred to by their names, their party affiliations and their state or district.
It is my opinion that once elected, they should be referred to by their names and states or districts, period. Leave the party out of it. Let everyone forget the party affiliation, including the legislator.
Frankly, being a financial kind of person, I feel that if elected officials persist in representing only the members of their party, they should not be paid by all their constituents.
Perhaps we ought to start a drive to adjust the salaries of elected officials. Those who only represent their parties should be paid a percentage of their assigned wages. They should only receive wages in proportion to the members of their party to the total registered voting population.
For instance, if they are Republican, and Republicans make up 35% of the voters in their constituency, they should receive only 35% of the budgeted salary.
This will never happen. But wouldn't it be something if it did?
Do you think it would help elected officials understand who they really represent?
Just one woman's opinion.
Eva Rosenberg
P.S. That 1313 number...well, this release did cause trouble, didn't it?
Recently, in a CBS.MarketWatch.com article I wrote, I made an error. Apparently, it was a big one. I mistakenly blamed IRS for press release issued by the U.S. Treasury Department.
April 9, 2004 U.S. Treasury Department Press release, ironically numbered JS-1313.
http://www.ustreas.gov/press/releases/js1313.htm
The press release contained this footnote:
America has a choice: It can continue to grow the economy and create new jobs as the President's policies are doing; or it can raise taxes on American families and small businesses, hurting economic recovery and future job creation
I was under the assumption that the US Treasury Department issues press releases for IRS - since so many of them are about taxes. Apparently not. IRS does their own press releases. And they don't include political statements on them.
IRS already has a bad enough rap - they don't need me to blame them for something they didn't do. I really should have checked my facts better. In fact, my editor did ask me about it - and I told him the Treasury issued releases for IRS. So wrong. I really must check my facts better.
It seems, even though we removed the error from my article as soon as we learned of the error, other major national publications ran with the story.
So, world, please accept my apologies.
However, that doesn't change the fact that an agency of the United States government included such a partisan statement. That brings up some questions
1) Should the US Treasury Department be including that kind of political statement with their press releases?
2) Was it a political statement, or just support for the country's head of state?
3) Who in their right mind would number a press release 1313 and not expect bad luck to follow?
Let's start with the second question:
2) Was it a political statement, or just support for the country's head of state?
Let's examine the statement more closely, shall we?
America has a choice: It can continue to grow the economy and create new jobs as the President's policies are doing; or it can raise taxes on American families and small businesses, hurting economic recovery and future job creation
Yup. It's definitely political. Without question, it's a swipe at the Democratic campaign.
Ironically enough, the economy grew dramatically under a Democratic president, Bill Clinton, and collapsed immediately after George Bush's shockingly pessimistic inaugural speech. Talk about a self-fulfilling prophecy - he said the economy would be getting worse - and precipitated one of the biggest slumps in stock market history.
I remember hearing his speech and being shocked. Immediately, I thought, oh no! People will act on this. Why did he need to say that? At his inauguration.
For Treasury to be simply supportive of the administration, the press release should have read more like:
America continues to grow the economy and create new jobs as the President's policies are taking effect.
But if it said that,...there would have been no reason to include it with the press release.
There's no reason why the US Treasury, or any department of the government can't support the policies of the admintration. In fact, they should, that's their job.
But, let's go back to the first question:
1) Should the US Treasury Department be including that kind of political statement with their press releases?
Absolutely not.
This is one of the things I find amazing about our politics. Why don't our elected officials understand?
When you are running for office, sure, you are a member of a party.
But once you get elected, you represent ALL your constituents.
You are supposed to look after the interests of all the people in your district, state, or area.
Your mandate is the good of the country - not your party.
I find it so frustrating that in all communications, on the House and Senate floor, in the media, in news articles, all legistlators are referred to by their names, their party affiliations and their state or district.
It is my opinion that once elected, they should be referred to by their names and states or districts, period. Leave the party out of it. Let everyone forget the party affiliation, including the legislator.
Frankly, being a financial kind of person, I feel that if elected officials persist in representing only the members of their party, they should not be paid by all their constituents.
Perhaps we ought to start a drive to adjust the salaries of elected officials. Those who only represent their parties should be paid a percentage of their assigned wages. They should only receive wages in proportion to the members of their party to the total registered voting population.
For instance, if they are Republican, and Republicans make up 35% of the voters in their constituency, they should receive only 35% of the budgeted salary.
This will never happen. But wouldn't it be something if it did?
Do you think it would help elected officials understand who they really represent?
Just one woman's opinion.
Eva Rosenberg
P.S. That 1313 number...well, this release did cause trouble, didn't it?
Tuesday, January 27, 2004
The State of the Union
Last week, President Bush delivered his State of the Union message.
Full text here
Sounds like we're in pretty good shape. People clapped a lot.
Two children were constantly targetted by the cameras. President
Bush singled out the current President of the Iraqi Governing
Council, Adnan Pachachi. I'll bet Mr. Pachachi never got this
much publicity in his life. But it was a good thing to do. We need
local support to make it possible for American troops to be able to
return home.
The President proposed one thing that I find disturbing, despite
all the applause.
"This year, some 600,000 inmates will be released from prison back
into society. We know from long experience that if they can't find
work, or a home, or help, they are much more likely to commit crime
and return to prison. So tonight, I propose a four-year, $300 million
prisoner re-entry initiative to expand job training and placement
services, to provide transitional housing, and to help newly released
prisoners get mentoring, including from faith-based groups. (Applause.)
America is the land of second chance, and when the gates of the prison
open, the path ahead should lead to a better life. (Applause.) "
From the State of the Union Message
Uh, folks, did I miss something here? What are these 600,000 inmates
doing during all those years they are incarcerated? They seem to have
time to file lots of frivolous lawsuits, runs phone scams and
mail order scams from behind bars, work out and build great bodies.
Pardon me, but why can't we use fraction of the money Bush proposes
to spend - and educate them and train them while they are in prison.
I thought they were there to get rehabilitated. Why doesn't that
include job training? Why doesn't that include the three Rs?Many prisoners end up incarcerated because of their feelings of
powerlessness because they never were able to learn to read and
function in our world. HELP THEM WHILE THEY ARE THERE!
And would it hurt to teach basic etiquette? Perhaps if it starts
in the prisons, it would spread back out to society?
Seriously, though, while these folks are in prison, we have an
excellent opportunity to provide training so when the leave,
they are able to step into jobs that will support them AND be
able to interact with people who might be a little leery of them.
It takes time for all to adapt. But why not lay the groundwork
while they are IN prison? Why spend THREE HUNDRED MILLION
of our dollars, teaching them after they get out?
Heck, a condition of being accepted for parole should be that
they have succcessfully and politely completed the training.
But that's just one TaxMama's opinion....who wonders...
just who will be getting the contracts or grants to handle this
training, housing and mentoring?
Last week, President Bush delivered his State of the Union message.
Full text here
Sounds like we're in pretty good shape. People clapped a lot.
Two children were constantly targetted by the cameras. President
Bush singled out the current President of the Iraqi Governing
Council, Adnan Pachachi. I'll bet Mr. Pachachi never got this
much publicity in his life. But it was a good thing to do. We need
local support to make it possible for American troops to be able to
return home.
The President proposed one thing that I find disturbing, despite
all the applause.
"This year, some 600,000 inmates will be released from prison back
into society. We know from long experience that if they can't find
work, or a home, or help, they are much more likely to commit crime
and return to prison. So tonight, I propose a four-year, $300 million
prisoner re-entry initiative to expand job training and placement
services, to provide transitional housing, and to help newly released
prisoners get mentoring, including from faith-based groups. (Applause.)
America is the land of second chance, and when the gates of the prison
open, the path ahead should lead to a better life. (Applause.) "
From the State of the Union Message
Uh, folks, did I miss something here? What are these 600,000 inmates
doing during all those years they are incarcerated? They seem to have
time to file lots of frivolous lawsuits, runs phone scams and
mail order scams from behind bars, work out and build great bodies.
Pardon me, but why can't we use fraction of the money Bush proposes
to spend - and educate them and train them while they are in prison.
I thought they were there to get rehabilitated. Why doesn't that
include job training? Why doesn't that include the three Rs?Many prisoners end up incarcerated because of their feelings of
powerlessness because they never were able to learn to read and
function in our world. HELP THEM WHILE THEY ARE THERE!
And would it hurt to teach basic etiquette? Perhaps if it starts
in the prisons, it would spread back out to society?
Seriously, though, while these folks are in prison, we have an
excellent opportunity to provide training so when the leave,
they are able to step into jobs that will support them AND be
able to interact with people who might be a little leery of them.
It takes time for all to adapt. But why not lay the groundwork
while they are IN prison? Why spend THREE HUNDRED MILLION
of our dollars, teaching them after they get out?
Heck, a condition of being accepted for parole should be that
they have succcessfully and politely completed the training.
But that's just one TaxMama's opinion....who wonders...
just who will be getting the contracts or grants to handle this
training, housing and mentoring?
Friday, April 18, 2003
Celebrating Freedom from Slavery
Suppose I came to you and offered you this holiday to
celebrate your freedom from slavery, would you want it?
First, for weeks before the holiday, the womenfolk will
scour, scrub and polish everything in the house, from
top to bottom.
They will get into all the corners, cupboards, closets.
crannies and cabinets and eliminate all crumbs, cobwebs,
and other crummy things.
Next, they'll clean all the dishes, pots and pans and
put them all away, locked securely behind doors or
hidden in pantries or covered up on top shelves.
With all the old things put away, they'll pull out a
whole other set of dishes, stored all year for just
this very occasion, and start removing a year's worth
of dust, detritus and dirt.
And now they're ready to start cooking up a storm for the
big celebration feast to come. After spending days, peeling,
paring, pounding, and polishing, they're ready for the
menfolk to step in - the evening before this celebration.
What do the menfolk do? They come along with a candle and a
feather and inspect the womenfolk's hard work. (Since the
women know they've done a good job, and their menfolk will
be disappointed and feel useless, the women are meant to hide up
to 10 tiny pieces of bread around the house. That way, the men
are heroes and feel fulfilled.)
After the inspection?
The menfolk go to their favorite easy-chairs, pick up their
newspapers, turn on their favorite sports or news shows, or
both and breathe a sigh of satisfaction for a job well done.
The womenfolk? Oh, they're still cooking for the upcoming feast.
On the night of this celebration of freedom, the men are
enthroned in their chairs at the glittering table, with lots
of pillows, so they can recline like kings. Their womenfolk
rush about serving and waiting on them hand and foot, even
to the point of bringing them a water basin so the men can wash
their delicate hands before partaking of this generous feast.
The men and boys do what? They get to spout on for hours
about how glorious is their freedom and how oppressive was
the slavery of their ancestors. They get to play hide-and-seek,
with their food, as they sate themselves on four brimming cups
of wine . They challenge each other's knowledge about slavery...
as the women continue mutely to serve them.
And when it's all done - around 1:00 a.m., if celebrated
properly, what now?
The menfolk get to toddle off to a cozy slumber, secure in
the knowledge that they conducted a grand feast and put
slavery to bed forever.
The womenfolk? Oh, they get to clean up and start all over
again for the next night - and to have the house ready for
breakfast and lunch before the 2nd major dinner feast.
So, are you eager for this celebration of the release from slavery?
We already have it.
It's called Passover.
---
© 2003 Eva Rosenberg, http://www.TaxMama.com ,
inspired by a comment from her mother.
Please feel free to pass this along to friends, with all the copyright
info intact. (I want to see how many times it comes back)
You may not publish this online, in print or e-mail newsletters
without permission. Contact taxmama@taxmama.com with 'Freedom'
in the subject line, to inquire about permissions and fees to publish.
Suppose I came to you and offered you this holiday to
celebrate your freedom from slavery, would you want it?
First, for weeks before the holiday, the womenfolk will
scour, scrub and polish everything in the house, from
top to bottom.
They will get into all the corners, cupboards, closets.
crannies and cabinets and eliminate all crumbs, cobwebs,
and other crummy things.
Next, they'll clean all the dishes, pots and pans and
put them all away, locked securely behind doors or
hidden in pantries or covered up on top shelves.
With all the old things put away, they'll pull out a
whole other set of dishes, stored all year for just
this very occasion, and start removing a year's worth
of dust, detritus and dirt.
And now they're ready to start cooking up a storm for the
big celebration feast to come. After spending days, peeling,
paring, pounding, and polishing, they're ready for the
menfolk to step in - the evening before this celebration.
What do the menfolk do? They come along with a candle and a
feather and inspect the womenfolk's hard work. (Since the
women know they've done a good job, and their menfolk will
be disappointed and feel useless, the women are meant to hide up
to 10 tiny pieces of bread around the house. That way, the men
are heroes and feel fulfilled.)
After the inspection?
The menfolk go to their favorite easy-chairs, pick up their
newspapers, turn on their favorite sports or news shows, or
both and breathe a sigh of satisfaction for a job well done.
The womenfolk? Oh, they're still cooking for the upcoming feast.
On the night of this celebration of freedom, the men are
enthroned in their chairs at the glittering table, with lots
of pillows, so they can recline like kings. Their womenfolk
rush about serving and waiting on them hand and foot, even
to the point of bringing them a water basin so the men can wash
their delicate hands before partaking of this generous feast.
The men and boys do what? They get to spout on for hours
about how glorious is their freedom and how oppressive was
the slavery of their ancestors. They get to play hide-and-seek,
with their food, as they sate themselves on four brimming cups
of wine . They challenge each other's knowledge about slavery...
as the women continue mutely to serve them.
And when it's all done - around 1:00 a.m., if celebrated
properly, what now?
The menfolk get to toddle off to a cozy slumber, secure in
the knowledge that they conducted a grand feast and put
slavery to bed forever.
The womenfolk? Oh, they get to clean up and start all over
again for the next night - and to have the house ready for
breakfast and lunch before the 2nd major dinner feast.
So, are you eager for this celebration of the release from slavery?
We already have it.
It's called Passover.
---
© 2003 Eva Rosenberg, http://www.TaxMama.com ,
inspired by a comment from her mother.
Please feel free to pass this along to friends, with all the copyright
info intact. (I want to see how many times it comes back)
You may not publish this online, in print or e-mail newsletters
without permission. Contact taxmama@taxmama.com with 'Freedom'
in the subject line, to inquire about permissions and fees to publish.
Wednesday, April 09, 2003
I just read an AP article, entitled -
IRS running out of funds to go after unpaid taxes
http://www.heraldnet.com/Stories/03/4/9/16781931.cfm
Doesn't that give you a warm fuzzy?
Maybe you can get away with not paying taxes at all, right?
Funny thing that happens when IRS doesn't have staff and time.
They take the easy way out.
What does that mean to you?
It means that if you owe tax money and IRS knows
how to find your assets, they'll just take them, if you
ignore their automated letters. (Did the reporter forget
to tell you that a whole lot of the system is automated?)
IRS knows
a) where you work (W-2s)
b) who your clients are (1099-MISCs)
c) where your money is (1099-INT, 1099-B, etc.)
d) where your home is (1098s)
e) what your driving (auto registrations)
They'll just send out levy notices on your accounts,
or garnishments on your wages.
All those short-staffed people won't be to your advantage.
The fact is, you won't be able to reach someone to help
you get off the hook - to help you stop those garnishments.
THAT's going to be the real problem with the budget shortfall.
When we need help - there won't be anyone there to HELP us!!!!!
OK, now, I'll tell you a little, tiny secret...there are special
phone lines for tax professionals to use to get help for our
clients. So, we're going to be just fine - and so will our clients.
But, you, out on your own thinking you're going to rip off the
system...well, there just won't be anyone there to help you
when you need it.
Hmmm...should I be gloating?
Is this budget cutback really designed to help provide more
income to Tax Professionals. Heck, I love it!
IRS running out of funds to go after unpaid taxes
http://www.heraldnet.com/Stories/03/4/9/16781931.cfm
Doesn't that give you a warm fuzzy?
Maybe you can get away with not paying taxes at all, right?
Funny thing that happens when IRS doesn't have staff and time.
They take the easy way out.
What does that mean to you?
It means that if you owe tax money and IRS knows
how to find your assets, they'll just take them, if you
ignore their automated letters. (Did the reporter forget
to tell you that a whole lot of the system is automated?)
IRS knows
a) where you work (W-2s)
b) who your clients are (1099-MISCs)
c) where your money is (1099-INT, 1099-B, etc.)
d) where your home is (1098s)
e) what your driving (auto registrations)
They'll just send out levy notices on your accounts,
or garnishments on your wages.
All those short-staffed people won't be to your advantage.
The fact is, you won't be able to reach someone to help
you get off the hook - to help you stop those garnishments.
THAT's going to be the real problem with the budget shortfall.
When we need help - there won't be anyone there to HELP us!!!!!
OK, now, I'll tell you a little, tiny secret...there are special
phone lines for tax professionals to use to get help for our
clients. So, we're going to be just fine - and so will our clients.
But, you, out on your own thinking you're going to rip off the
system...well, there just won't be anyone there to help you
when you need it.
Hmmm...should I be gloating?
Is this budget cutback really designed to help provide more
income to Tax Professionals. Heck, I love it!
Monday, April 07, 2003
Last week, one of my tax pro readers brought it to my attention that the State of California had some legislation pending that will affect tax preparers.They tried it last year and got shouted down. Governor Davis proposed it again. It would require all tax preparers who prepare over 100 tax returns to file all returns electronically. It would assess a penalty if we don't.
Do you have any idea how many tax preparers in the State of California are not set up for this? Or how many are still charging SO little, especially in the smaller towns, that it would completely put them out of business?
Following is my open letter to Governor Gray Davis. Similar letters were sent to California State Senators and Assemblymembers.
Dear Governor Davis,
I'd really like to add my voice to those objecting to this proposal.
http://www.ftb.ca.gov/professionals/eServices/efile/news.html#1b
You are receiving substantial tax monies to handle administration.
As tax preparers, we often don't get paid enough to make all the
detailed entries required for e-filing.
For instance, when a client works for the film industry, s/he may
have 20 W-2s. For me to enter ALL of them,with all the details
needed for e-filing, would take me well over an hour extra.
Do you think that client will be willing to pay me and extra
$150.00 for that task? I know they won't.
For you to do that, it might cost as little as $15.00.
I had another client who had a list of 300 stock transactions.
Naturally, in this market, resulting in over $50,000 of losses.
Do you have ANY idea how long THAT would have taken
me to enter, line by line? Including proof-reading, that might
have meant an entire day. There is no way I could charge that
client over $1000 extra, after he had given me a neatly printed
schedule that I can attach to the return. Yet, to file it electronically
would have required that.
You require that we maintain signed Forms 8453 in our files;
signed before the return is transmitted. Well, for tax professionals
who don't do simple W-2 only returns, we rarely have our clients
present when we complete their returns. It may take days or
weeks to track them down, get them the form to sign and get
a signed form back, whether original or faxed. For some clients,
it's simply not practical to file electronically.
And then there are those people who have complex returns
with K-1s and other pass-through income/loss that has errors
on them. Sometimes, we have to over ride lines in the program
and attach explanations. We can't e-file those returns either.
Sorry, folks. We pay good tax money to cover your staff's wages.
Please use it for the purpose intended, not to make us an
unpaid part of your staff.
Where we can file electronically, we will.
But you can't penalize us for not doing your job.
I respectfully request that you quash this bill.
Sincerely,
Eva Rosenberg, EA
President
TaxAnxiety.com, Inc.
Do you have any idea how many tax preparers in the State of California are not set up for this? Or how many are still charging SO little, especially in the smaller towns, that it would completely put them out of business?
Following is my open letter to Governor Gray Davis. Similar letters were sent to California State Senators and Assemblymembers.
Dear Governor Davis,
I'd really like to add my voice to those objecting to this proposal.
http://www.ftb.ca.gov/professionals/eServices/efile/news.html#1b
You are receiving substantial tax monies to handle administration.
As tax preparers, we often don't get paid enough to make all the
detailed entries required for e-filing.
For instance, when a client works for the film industry, s/he may
have 20 W-2s. For me to enter ALL of them,with all the details
needed for e-filing, would take me well over an hour extra.
Do you think that client will be willing to pay me and extra
$150.00 for that task? I know they won't.
For you to do that, it might cost as little as $15.00.
I had another client who had a list of 300 stock transactions.
Naturally, in this market, resulting in over $50,000 of losses.
Do you have ANY idea how long THAT would have taken
me to enter, line by line? Including proof-reading, that might
have meant an entire day. There is no way I could charge that
client over $1000 extra, after he had given me a neatly printed
schedule that I can attach to the return. Yet, to file it electronically
would have required that.
You require that we maintain signed Forms 8453 in our files;
signed before the return is transmitted. Well, for tax professionals
who don't do simple W-2 only returns, we rarely have our clients
present when we complete their returns. It may take days or
weeks to track them down, get them the form to sign and get
a signed form back, whether original or faxed. For some clients,
it's simply not practical to file electronically.
And then there are those people who have complex returns
with K-1s and other pass-through income/loss that has errors
on them. Sometimes, we have to over ride lines in the program
and attach explanations. We can't e-file those returns either.
Sorry, folks. We pay good tax money to cover your staff's wages.
Please use it for the purpose intended, not to make us an
unpaid part of your staff.
Where we can file electronically, we will.
But you can't penalize us for not doing your job.
I respectfully request that you quash this bill.
Sincerely,
Eva Rosenberg, EA
President
TaxAnxiety.com, Inc.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
