Discussion:Why Didn't CPA Include Undeposited Funds on 1120S?

From TaxAlmanac, A Free Online Resource for Tax Professionals
Note: You are using this website at your own risk, subject to our Disclaimer and Website Use and Contribution Terms.

From TaxAlmanac

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 00:34, 21 October 2009
Kevinh5 (Talk | contribs)
(what happened wa)
← Previous diff
Revision as of 07:13, 21 October 2009
Natalie (Talk | contribs)
(Thanks Kevin. I)
Next diff →
Line 236: Line 236:
{{ForumReplyPost|UserID=Kevinh5|Date=21 October 2009|Text=what happened was I edited the joke to not offend Natalie}} {{ForumReplyPost|UserID=Kevinh5|Date=21 October 2009|Text=what happened was I edited the joke to not offend Natalie}}
 +
 +{{ForumReplyPost|UserID=Natalie|Date=October 21, 2009|Text=Thanks Kevin. I'm not sure I was offended by it. It's just that I knew it would bring up this whole issue again about EAs vs CPAs, and it's just not a positive thing.}}

Revision as of 07:13, 21 October 2009

Discussion Forum Index --> Basic Tax Questions --> Why Didn't CPA Include Undeposited Funds on 1120S?
Discussion Forum Index --> Tax Questions --> Why Didn't CPA Include Undeposited Funds on 1120S?

Sandy L (talk|edits) said:

10 October 2009
I have a cash-based S corp client whose fiscal year ends June 30th. In reviewing the client's return for period ended 6/30/09, I see that the CPA didn't include the client's 8k in undeposited funds on the balance sheet (1120S Schedule L). Obviously, the books accounted for the amount.

Sound like an error on behalf of the CPA? Doesn't sound like good practice to me. I'm going to call her (CPA) on Mon.

Belle (talk|edits) said:

October 10, 2009
So how did the CPA get the Balance Sheet to balance if the 'undeposited' funds weren't on there?

I usually include them in the cash figure, assuming that the funds are subsequently deposited within a reasonable time.

Sandy L (talk|edits) said:

10 October 2009
It's not in balance. I'm e-mailing her now and will follow-up Mon. She literally just left out the 8k on Line 1-Cash.

So, now the balance sheet in QB is off by 8k vs. the 1120S, Schedule L. Nice.

Belle (talk|edits) said:

October 10, 2009
Yikes!

My software (while no substitute for a tax professional - Hi Kevin) SCREAMS at me if things don't balance. Keep us posted on the outcome.

And it's interesting that you have an S-corp with a fiscal year end. Rather unusual, I believe.

Southparkcpa (talk|edits) said:

10 October 2009
My guess is that the CPA treated it like Accts receivable and "backed it out" of income and either it is NOT on the balance sheet and is backed out of income OR he treated is as M1. Wrong, but if we are playing family feud, that has to be a top guess!

Personally, I "HATE" when I see an accrual Balance sheet on a tax return that is cash basis and then see an M1 item called "acc to cash diff".

Please let usknow.

Smokeytax (talk|edits) said:

10 October 2009
Perhaps it's related to one of those Urban Legends, that I think we've discussed on this forum.

Specifically, when our cash basis clients inform us that they held up on depositing all checks that came in after November 1 in order to avoid paying tax on the income.

It's almost as good as when they tell us that they left a few checks blank so that they could write checks dated 12/31 after the fact & still have them be in order relating to the January checks they wrote subsequently.

All of this as per what their infamous "previous accountant" had advised them was standard procedure.

Michaelstar (talk|edits) said:

10 October 2009
Southpark's answer seems most in line with my thinking on this as well.

What strikes me though as strange - is a June y/e for an S-Corp. There are specific rules on required y/e's for S-Corps so I hope that is not an issue that has not at least been checked on as well.

Sandy L (talk|edits) said:

10 October 2009
Thanks for your replies. I'll post the outcome.

Smokeytax: The client's receipts are largely generated via credit card sales. So, it can take up to x-amount of days for the monies to be deposited into the biz checking. Hence, the rather material undeposited funds amount. By all means, the undeposited funds amount can climb as high as 20k, at times, contingent on sales.

Michaelstar: Huh, interesting. Something I need to research now that you bring it up. I must admit that this is the only client I've encountered that's a cash-based S corp w/a June y/e.

Seaside CPA (talk|edits) said:

10 October 2009
S-Corps can have fiscal year-ends. However, Form 8752 should be filed annually in order to calculate and pay the "required payment."

Natalie (talk|edits) said:

October 10, 2009
Intuit should move the "Undeposited funds" account up the chart of accounts ladder and include it with the cash by default. I'm curious as well to find out how the balance sheet was balanced.

Michaelstar (talk|edits) said:

10 October 2009
Sandy - I'll add a little more here on the "fiscal" year end of S-Corp's to help out.

S-Corp's can a have fiscal y/e if it is a "natural" business year. See Sec 1378. It needs to pass certain tests but it can be done.

S-Corp's can also have a fiscal y/e if its majority shareholders are on the same year. See Rev.Proc. 2002-37 and 2002-38

S-Corp's can have a fiscal y/e under the special election of sec 444 for which SeasideCPA is referring to by pointing out Form 8752 but this can become expensive in that the deposit does not flow through to the s/h's and the deposit is non-interest bearing.

These are all issues I would want to look at and document in my perm file for the client just to satisfy myself if I were preparing the return.


So yes, there are multiple reasons - but still - a fiscal y/e for an S-Corp is out of the ordinary

Belle (talk|edits) said:

October 10, 2009
Natalie, I agree.

The way QB handles it makes the money basically 'cash (or checks) on hand'. Just because you haven't gotten to the bank yet doesn't change the fact that it's income.

Sandy's description sounds more like a deposit(s)in transit - but still income.

I'm curious to hear the end of this story.

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

10 October 2009
Why did the accountant cross the road?



Because when he looked in the file, he saw that's what he did the last year.



In other words, the prior CPA just kept doing what he had done before. SALY.

Michaelstar (talk|edits) said:

10 October 2009
Kevin, Kevin, Kevin.........

Sandy L (talk|edits) said:

11 October 2009
Wow, you guys make me even more excited to become certified. Thanks for your replies.


Southparkcpa: I just double-checked. It's a fact that the 8k's not on the balance sheet. It wasn't backed out of income or treated as M1, either????


Seaside CPA: I just reviewed Form 8752. Not sure if/when the client files the form. More fact-finding is needed on this point...


Natalie: Well, I specifically mapped the Undeposited Funds account in QB to the B/S-Assets: Cash acct. to make it elementary for tax software.


Michaelstar: Thanks for all the great info. I am reading up on all you cited.

Natalie (talk|edits) said:

October 11, 2009
Kevin, that comment really doesn't belong here.

Southparkcpa (talk|edits) said:

11 October 2009
Totally as an aside.

I make it VERY CLEAR to my clients that undeposited funds should always be zero. It is a holding/control account for a transaction(s).

When you receive payments, make the deposit or why bother.

I teach my clients to batch process their reciepts. The balance in the undeposited funds should MATCH the deposit ticket which was added by hand. THEN and only then you make the deposit in QB's, which will agree to the deposit ticket. I hate when a client puts indicidual checks as deposits.

"Show me a client with a balance in their "undeposited funds" and I will show you a client with weak internal controls."

Harry Boscoe (talk|edits) said:

11 October 2009
You guys are so sophisticated with your computers and programs and all that software stuff. Gotta have a place for everything and the books always have to balance, and Schedule L ties into Schedule M and taxable income reconciles to book income and and and ...

My favorite account on a client's books was the Chinese restaurant's "Cash in Drawer" account. It represented all the sales that hadn't been rung up on the cash register. Where the money went to nobody knows.

CrowJD (talk|edits) said:

11 October 2009
There's some benefit to not being able to speak the national tongue, or at least pretending you can't speak it. When IRS man comes, honorable business owner forget how to speak English, and she don't understand nothing. Since they don't smoke cigar in China, they have hard time explaining where cigar box comes from.

P.S. Come to think of it, they probably do smoke cigars in China today. Nothing that gives a rich man more satisfaction than toking on a blast furnace and blowing noxious smoke into the faces of his more financially strapped associates.

Southparkcpa (talk|edits) said:

11 October 2009
Harry

That reminds me of my favorite "reconciling item".

I ask the book keeper..... "Is cash reconciled", she says of course.

Then I see large amounts of "Cash on books, not in bank".

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

11 October 2009
Natalie, it wasn't an original statement, it is an old joke. Try googling it. If the post had been 'why did the prior accountant ...', I would have used the term 'accountant' and not 'CPA'. We probably have all been guilty of just doing the same as last year. That's what makes the joke so funny. Because it's so true. About us all.

Michaelstar (talk|edits) said:

11 October 2009
Kevin - I see no humor in it at all - that is why you were called on it - again.

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

11 October 2009
the joke is on all of us, Michael.

I know that every time I have to do a 263 calculation, I have to look up how I did it the prior year.

But perhaps you aren't like that Michael. If so, then I could see why you wouldn't get the joke.

You won't get these either:

or these
or these

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

11 October 2009
but someone else might think these are funny

Jimi (talk|edits) said:

11 October 2009
SALY sure stirred up some opinions. I did not think it was inappropriate. As Kevin said, it is an old but true joke. If you are an accountant or a tax preparer, it is both a tool to use and a trap to fall into.

I did not opine on this last year so my current opinion is not SALY.

Sandy L (talk|edits) said:

11 October 2009
Southparkcpa: Not certain of why using Undeposited Funds is such a point of contention. You say, "When you receive payments, make the deposit or why bother."

Your statement is based on the assumption that the client has immediate control over when the payment is deposited into the biz checking. This isn't the case for my client who generates the majority of its revenue via CC transactions. Funds from said transactions may take up to several days to be deposited into the biz checking. Hence, the need for Undeposited Funds in QB. It would rarely, if ever, be zero.

Natalie (talk|edits) said:

October 11, 2009
Jimi, Kevin is well aware of the history behind this type of joke on TA and the many discussions about CPAs vs EAs et al.

Kevin, I did recognize the joke. It just does not belong here.

Southpark, I respectfully disagree with your comment that anyone who has a balance in their undeposited funds account does not have good internal controls. I agree that in most cases it should periodically zero out, however. Sandy L just gave a good example of when it doesn't.

Blrgcpa (talk|edits) said:

11 October 2009
Way back when the law was changed, fiscal year s corps were able to apply to keep the fiscal year and be grandfathered in.

Outwesttax (talk|edits) said:

11 October 2009
With respect to CC receipts and "undeposited funds". I would prefer (and recommend to my clients) that when the CC batch is transmitted to the processor, you make a deposit to match the settlement printout. That will clear the undeposited funds account. Of course, you will not see the deposit in your online banking till several days later. We used to call that "deposits in transit" on old manual reconciliations. (a more accurate term in my view.)

Even though CC payments take some time to clear, that is not a reason to delay posting the deposit and clearing undeposited funds

Southparkcpa (talk|edits) said:

12 October 2009
Yep.... I agree. I do NOT do any retail so I did not consider the example.

Although I like Outwests point. In theory.... the undeposited funds account is unique to only QB's and in theory should NOT exist and for us older CPA's we did the job with the account. In fact, the account is really unreconciled/recognized deposits. BUT I see your position clearly.

I do believe that the account should zero out "occasionally".

Excellent point Sandy and Natalie. My sincerest apologies!

Natalie (talk|edits) said:

October 12, 2009
No need to apologize, Matt. Actually, now that I think about it more, I agree with Outwest that the credit card charges are deposits in transit and really shouldn't be in the undeposited funds account after the settlement has been made. It's simply a cash on hand account.

One of my clients had an undeposited funds account that didn't clear most of the time. I had to really look at it to see what was happening. They use an outside provider to collect customer payments. The payments were recorded the date the provider received them. The deposits were then made about 10 days later. In addition, they had some funds coming in that they deposited on their own into two different bank accounts. In order to simply this account a little, I recommended the client set up another AR account for the provider payments. That helped a little, but they still have a balance in their account because they make their deposits every two or three days.

Sandy L (talk|edits) said:

12 October 2009
Natalie: Although I agree with Outwesttax and you that the deposits are, in fact, "in transit," by virtue of being "in transit," they are undeposited. It's a fact that, regardless of "when" the settlement is made, the funds will not be avail. in the biz checking for days, contingent on the merchant service provider.


As such, I wouldn't dare advise my client to clear the undeposited funds by making a deposit to match the settlement printout when the "in transit" amounts may take up to ten days to actually be deposited into the bank account. Why? Because, this creates a huge A/P issue.


If the funds are accounted for in the check register, however, haven't actually been deposited into the business checking, then I have a client on my hands writing checks and paying bills with funds that aren't available. Critical point, which brings me back to my hardcore stance that undeposited funds is absolutely necessary, at times, in QB.


Still waiting to hear from the CPA on the 8k...

RGCPA (talk|edits) said:

12 October 2009
Stop wasting your time on the 8k. The income got picked up the tax return if the B/S sheet is out of balance by the 8k. The accountant missed it. It doesn't change the bottom line. What are you going to do when the CPA says, "Sorry, I missed it."? You surely won't amend the tax return bc the B/S doesn't balance.

Sandy L (talk|edits) said:

12 October 2009
RGCPA: No, the income didn't get picked up...

Furthermore, with all the SALY talk--I checked out what the CPA did last year. She did include the undeposited funds amount on Line 1 Cash on the B/S.

WIBadgerCPA (talk|edits) said:

12 October 2009
If the income didn't get picked up, how is the balance sheet out of balance? It sounded to me like the balance sheet didn't include the undeposited funds in cash, resulting in assets not being equal to liabilities. If so, I agree with RGCPA. If you record income, your retained earnings will increase along with the balance sheet, and you will still be off the $8,000, won't you?

Sounds like the prior may have imported the accounts from the accounting software into the tax software, but not had a tax code on the undeposited funds account, resulting in it not getting pull

WIBadgerCPA (talk|edits) said:

12 October 2009
If the income didn't get picked up, how is the balance sheet out of balance? It sounded to me like the balance sheet didn't include the undeposited funds in cash, resulting in assets not being equal to liabilities. If so, I agree with RGCPA. If you record income, your retained earnings will increase along with the balance sheet, and you will still be off the $8,000, won't you?

Sounds like the prior may have imported the accounts from the accounting software into the tax software, but not had a tax code on the undeposited funds account, resulting in it not getting pull

RGCPA (talk|edits) said:

12 October 2009
If the 8k of income didn't get picked up then the B/S should balance. You said the B/S doesn't balance bc of the 8K. That means the 8k is in liab or equity.

Natalie (talk|edits) said:

October 12, 2009
Sandy, if your client's merchant funds are taking up to 10 days to clear the bank, I would recommend one of two things:

1. Find another service provider that will deposit the funds on a more timely basis. Ten days is way too long. (I know it happens, and I know there are providers who will charge the same or less and deposit more frequently.)

2. Have the client set up a separate AR account as my client did. That way the undeposited funds account should clear on a more regular basis.

I think it's important to know that the undeposited funds account is clearing periodically so you/management can tell there's no funny stuff going on.

Fsteincpa (talk|edits) said:

20 October 2009
And the outcome was? But I agree with RGCPA. The amount is miniscule. Make ti right prospectively and move on.

I would imagine that if it wasn't backed out of income, then they list AR <even if they are cash basis> on the B/S and the number is included there.

Does the total assets per QB = T/R and the same for liab and equity?

As for Kevin's joke, it was quite funny. As long as I have last years airplane, I can fly this years ship. One of the oldest jokes in the book.

The battle between EA and CPA is a silly one, but we all still need to be able to laugh about jokes. I refuse to walk on eggshells, I much prefer pretty little things walking on my back in high heels instead.

Soooooooooooooooooooooooo, what happened?

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

21 October 2009
what happened was I edited the joke to not offend Natalie

Natalie (talk|edits) said:

October 21, 2009
Thanks Kevin. I'm not sure I was offended by it. It's just that I knew it would bring up this whole issue again about EAs vs CPAs, and it's just not a positive thing.