Discussion:I really messed up this time
From TaxAlmanac
Discussion Forum Index --> Basic Tax Questions --> I really messed up this time
Discussion Forum Index --> Tax Questions --> I really messed up this time
| 31 May 2008 | |
| I really messed up this time.
Back last fall, I was ready to transmit 2006 returns for a client who is out of town in the army and not that accessible. Info came in late from a passthrough entity & I was struggling to get the return done by 10/15. When it came time to get the efile authorization forms signed, we decided that the client's father, who has a general power of attorney could sign the form. Instead of signing the efile authorization forms, he mistakenly signed page two of the tax returns, and then went out of town for an extended period of time. I saved the signed pages and went ahead and transmitted the returns. Now, the state (Maryland) is spot checking and has asked for a copy of the signed efile authorization form (as well as a copy of the nonresident state return upon which we based a credit). I'm thoroughly chastised about my carelessness, and am thinking that the State would be justified in yanking my authorization to efile clients' returns. Any advice on how I should proceed in my communication with the state? | |
| 31 May 2008 | |
| Busybee,
Stuff happens. If it's your first offense, they might let you off with a warning. As a MD practitioner myself, I can't imagine them revoking e-file status for what I would consider an innocent mistake on one return. Tell them the truth, tell them you've made changes to your internal procedures so that this type of mistake won't happen again and see what they say. Good luck. Tom | |
| 31 May 2008 | |
| Thanks, Tom.
That sounds like great advice. The state seems so interested in having as many of the returns as possible e-filed, that I'm hoping they have a general policy of lenience in cases like mine. I'll keep you posted. | |
| 31 May 2008 | |
| Busybee,
Yes, they are interested in e-file to the point where your aggressions are going to have to be really egregious to have it revoked, i.e., false returns, not keeping records, etc. At least you have a signature. It's not like you didn't get one. I think you will be fine. Tom | |
Southparkcpa (talk|edits) said: | 31 May 2008 |
| Yes, I agree with Tom. This happened to my practice several years ago. In general, at that time we only get the fed 8879 signed. NC does nothave a separate signature page and accepts the fed yetSC requires a specific signature page which we did not have (our oversight but we did have a fed 8879). I asked my client to sign a SC8879 after the fact but we did NOT lie or back date it and SC was fine with this. What I believe they are looking for are preparers who as a matter of practice E file returns without client signature and then get the 8879 later. I know a few small solo shops that do this and it somply baffles my mind that a preparer would E file a return without a signed 8879. | |
| 31 May 2008 | |
| It's like a finding in an audit. By itself it is minor, have many many and things become an issue. The states and the feds are not looking for perfection. They understand people screw up. They are making sure there aren't people intentionally violating the rules.
Don't sweat it. | |
Actionbsns (talk|edits) said: | 31 May 2008 |
| BusyBee, if it makes you feel any better, I found a mistake on Thursday that has me kicking myself really hard and I have to talk to the client Monday about it. There are two things that makes me so mad at myself, first there was a nagging little thought in my head when I e-filed that I ignored, and I already have to amend three tax returns for this client for leaving off rental income from a family member. What I did was to e-file last week from my desk top computer, which is where all e-files are done, but the return on that computer was incomplete, the completed return is on the laptop, which I use exclusively, but I hadn't moved the completed data file for e-filing and storage. On the incomplete return there are small refunds, on the actual return they owe $2100, which they have paid. So now I have to amend the return and look like a dope to the client again. It's a long term client, and I think I'll be OK, but I'm so mad at myself for not listening to the little voice in my head. I had moved their S Corp over and had the name in my mind as having moved both returns.
Good luck with your issue. If you search the board there is a thread on this from prior years and Kevin's response to the issue was (loosely quoted) "If you don't find mistakes sometimes, you're not doing enough returns". | |
| 31 May 2008 | |
| You are going to be OK. This is just compliance stuff and they are not going to nail you for one offense. If you want to go overboard why not ask the client's father (general power of attorney ) for a brief letter stating that he accidently signed the return instead of the 8879 however at the time had reviewwd and approved the returns for E-filing. Presumably the date he signed the return is before the date you E-filed which helps your case .
You might want to have ready for inspection the other 99.9999% of other E-filed returns where you were in perfect compliance. Put on the ole "dog and pony show " and be proud of your adherence to IRS rules 99.9999% of the time. Remember in the perfect world we would have no amended returns . | |
| 18 August 2008 | |
| Followup - I was asked to send several more eFile authorization forms, all of which I had.
Now, several months later, I haven't heard back from Maryland, so I'm assuming that everything was accepted. The notable part was that all of the requests were relating to returns that had large credits for taxes paid by residents to other states, and part of what I had to send in was hard copies of the out of state returns, so I'm thinking that was what the state was most concerned about. Thank you all for your support on this. | |
| 18 August 2008 | |
| My current firm (that I joined about a year ago) efiles returns without prior authorization. It absolutely drives me nuts. If I had to bet, we MAY have 50% of the 8879s for the returns we have filed to date.
Partners don't think it is a big deal...we'll see. | |
| 3 September 2008 | |
| 94nole: I'd think long and hard about the ethics of being associated with the firm you mention. If they're willing to bend on the required rules here, where else? | |
| 3 September 2008 | |
| Hi gosssh explain the facts to the father get one signed by him dont make a mountain out of a molehill. bye | |
