TaxmanHog wrote:
- quote -

I'll have to admit my figures were about three years old,
obtained by a data entry person up in Dayton, OH.

Cheer$,
HL

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

"Harlan Lunsford" wrote

- quote -

In some areas of the country where special pay rate zones
are in effect:
Entry level
Grades 3 step 1 - $10.00
to as high as
Senior level
Grade 5 step 10 = $16.80

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

MTW wrote:
- quote -

By George you've got it! I think you've got it!

- quote -

Everyone knows about minimum pay for data entry clerks at
service centers. and not talking about 5.25 an hour of
course, but more like 8 or 9. And that is where the IRS
errors occur and what eflinging avoids.

Cheer$,
Harlan Lunsford

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

MTW wrote:
- quote -

But with e-filing, all the errors are perfectly transmitted
too! :-)

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Victor Roberts wrote:

- quote -

But, frankly, given the sorry history of IRS technology
projects, the errors on the programming side are not
something to dismiss. As well, because a computer does
exactly what it is told very quickly, a problem there can be
a lot bigger than a single incompetent data entry clerk.

As well, good computer systems will, via edit checks, be
able to catch most errors that data entry clerks make before
they enter the system. A tax return, by its very nature,
offers up a bunch of edit checks that the system can perform
to catch data entry mistakes.

The reality is that, given returns that are computer
generated and printed, which eliminate many *taxpayer*
errors or simple illegibility, the IRS doesn't seem to make
very many data entry errors that aren't trapped by the
system before any issue arises for the taxpayer.

My own experience, frankly, is that we run into a lot more
erroneous notices due to programming glitches. While those
aren't incredibly common, they are a lot more common in my
practice than data entry glitches (which haven't existed).

--
Ed Zollars, CPA
Phoenix, Arizona

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Harlan Lunsford <lunstax[at]bellsouth.net> wrote:

- quote -

Sorry, I'm not sure that I get your drift.

But, I would point out that the paper returns I send to the
IRS are ALSO the data that I personally keyed in. Said
return will not differ in any respect from a return that I
might efile since BOTH would be prepared by exactly the same
program.

So, when the IRS claims that efiled returns are more
accurate, the only way such statement could be true in my
case would be if the "errors" were caused by the manner in
which the IRS processes paper returns.

Therefore, the IRS is criticizing itself when it claims that
efiled returns are more accurate.

Now, if the IRS chose to say that returns prepared by
computer are more accurate than returns prepared by HAND,
that is probably a true statement. Ditto if they said that
efiled returns (obviously prepared or processed by computer)
are more accurate than returns prepared by HAND. But, that
ISN'T what they have been saying.

MTW

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Victor Roberts <Vic[at]Lighting-Research.com> writes:
- quote -

Victor, none of what you wrote above contradicts the posting
to which you were replying. MTW didn't say that efiled
return processing would have the same rate of errors as
keypunching; he said that efiled return processing wouldn't
be *perfect*, which you've agreed with by agreeing that
there would be programming mistakes.

Granted, one could argue that the assertion that efile
processing wouldn't be perfect is a tautology, since the IRS
isn't assertion perfection, they're merely asserting a lower
error rate. But still, I think it's important not to
mischaracterize other people's assertions.

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

MTW wrote:
- quote -

Wait a cotton pickin minute!

Remember, that an efile tax return received by the IRS is
what I personally key in. No need to add to that , you
getmydrift.

Cheer$,
Harlan Lunsford

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

MTW" <mtwingcpa[at]yahoo.com> wrote:
- quote -

No. Computers are much better than humans for doing
repetitive operations the same way every time. I agree that
humans may make mistakes when programming the computers, but
once programmed correctly, a computer will have a much lower
error rate than a human operator when doing the same job
over and over and over again.

The IRS promotion of efiling does not denigrate itself. It
just acknowledges the fact that humans can and do make
mistakes.

--
Vic Roberts

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

"MTW" <mtwingcpa[at]yahoo.com> wrote
- quote -

Well, I'm sure the IRS would rather blame you for mistakes
than to have to correct their own.

Stu

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

TaxmanHog wrote:

- quote -

Similarly, the law of averages tells me that programming
errors are going to occur, causing electronic filing to fail
in various ways from time to time.

But our point is simple--between the two of us, with more
years of experience than *either* of us would likely want to
admit <grin> , we've not seen this rampant data entry error
issue.

It's not that tough to develop good control systems to
handle most obvious data entry errors through decent edit
checks on the data entry itself. I suspect that a computer
generated tax return, which eliminates the issue of
deciphering handwriting, gets the data entry error rate that
will result in erroneous notices down to an extremely low
level.

Heck, if data entry was that big a problem think of all the
issues we all should have had for years with all of the
bills and invoices we paid, most of which were paper that
had to be input. And let's not forget those little slips of
paper called checks, which also have data input issues.

Reality is that, for data entry errors, the IRS with a
computer generated tax return has not been a major problem.
Our point wasn't that they were terrible--rather that
efiling proponents parrot the "data entry errors are
eliminated" line as if that was a huge incentive to go to
efiling.

So, you see, the point Mike and I were making isn't that the
IRS keypunch operators are lousy and horrendously error
prone. Rather, it was just the opposite.

--
Ed Zollars, CPA
Phoenix, Arizona

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

- quote -

we charge $20 for fed and state combined and will not e-file
anything we don't prepare

We also this year, thanks to the bright lights at MN
revenue, are charging a fee to clients who DO NOT e-file the
MN return.

As MDR will be assessing a fine of up to $5 per return we
don't e-file - we pass this on to our fearful of e-file
clients who wish to wait 90-120 days for a paper filed
return's refund to get back to them.

When they hear that, vs. the 3-7 day turnaround with the MN
e-filed return, they jump at it....

Dave

"Hid in the reeds are eyes that peek,
voices I don't understand.
Flamingos fly endlessly,
To the silent sky"

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

TaxmanHog <taxmanhog[at]comcast.net> wrote:

- quote -

I'm sure that neither Ed nor I intend any personal offense
to anyone who works for the IRS. We just find it ironic that
the IRS promotes efiling by denigrating itself.

And, by the way, wouldn't that same "law of averages"
guarantee that the processing of efiled returns won't be
perfect, either?

MTW

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Ed Zollars, CPA wrote:

- quote -

"MTW" wrote:
- quote -

Jeez Ed & Mike,

No tolerance for errors?
You & your staff do not make errors?

It's not a matter of incompetence, the law of averages
guarantees that keying errors are going to occur.

I do not recall the exact tolerances but it was not unusual
to find errors, so long as one's over all average error rate
within a block of work, a work day and a review period (two
weeks) did not exceed the acceptable tolerances, then the
work is viewed as acceptable.

The key punch operators have a financial motivation to do a
speedy & accurate job, they earn a QUALITY/SPEED bonus based
on cumulative keystrokes and get docked for accuracy errors,
If they are fast and absolutely perfect zero errors, the
bonus can be nearly as much as their base salary. If they
get a bit sloppy but stay under tolerance they still earn a
bonus, if the sloppiness gets out of hand they get ZERO
bonus.

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Arthur L. Rubin wrote:
- quote -

Well of COURSE the client gets a full copy of the returns
(usually three).

- quote -

No problem there, cause my tax software saves the data.
Plus it generates a full report end of year of all returns
with name and social security number as required by IRS
recordkeeping.

- quote -

Well, one copy to IRS and copies to two states with
schedules, that's a lot of paper and toner, even if I use
the toner saver option on the printer.

- quote -

No no no. I'm talking of accuracy at IRS service center.
You know,when a paper return is receipted a human being (we
hope) has to then re enter the data, and screwups do occur.
We've all seen that, thus generating a CPC 2000 notice
later. Good example was the fellow in Florida who told his
sad tale here of their making the old slide error in
entering his social security thus sending him a huge refund
check.

The only CPC2000 notices I see are never from data entry
errors at IRS, but from clients' omissions of 1099's.

Cheer$,
Harlan Lunsford

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Ed Zollars, CPA <ezollar[at]mindspring.com> wrote:

- quote -

Yeah, that's kind of ironic! I guess they're saying, "Our
keypunch people are incompetent, but our programmers are
infallible."

Just for the record, I have NEVER had a "fact of filing"
problem (with uncertified mailed returns) in 27 years. I did
have one keypunch error on a 2000 return. However, from what
little the IRS was willing to admit to in that case, it
sounded like the problem was more likely caused by a
PROGRAMMING/PROCESSING error than a than a keypunch problem.
(Selected expense items from a Schedule E were coded as
INCOME items on the face of the 1040.)

MTW

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Harlan Lunsford wrote:

- quote -

At which point I have to then deal with the return one more
time--and I do bill by the hour. And, frankly, my DUTY,
under Arizona state law and regulation, is to the client in
tax matters. And I serve as an adviser, not a decision maker.

I present the facts related to efiling to the client and let
the client make the decision. Some clients decide in favor
and some decide against. Could I force the matter and get
them to all efile? Sure. But my job is not to force them,
but rather to advise them on the decisions they need to make
related to tax matters and then *they* make the decisions.

There are both advantages and disadvantages to efiling for
the client. Interestingly enough, we've not had a single
IRS keypunch error in the past ten years that has resulted
in a notice that we've received. Nor have we had an issue
with whether or not returns have been received (certified
mail is such an amazing thing <grin> ).

- quote -

Well, if I had an accuracy problem on paper filed returns I
might agree, but...

(P.S. to Mike Wing--do you also find it somewhat amusing
that the supposed incompetence of the IRS is given as a key
reason why we should use efile--and trust they've figured
out how to put together a solid electronic system <grin> .)

--
Ed Zollars, CPA
Phoenix, Arizona

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Harlan Lunsford wrote:

- quote -

The client SHOULD receive a transcript containing at least
the information which would be on a paper return. It doesn't
seem likely that it would be many fewer pages than the
actual paper return.

You SHOULD retain (at least a way to regenerate) EXACTLY
what the client has. It could be PDF files, but I find
it difficult to scan for information in PDF documents...

I don't see that it saves on paper except on the copy
sent to the IRS and to the state(s).

- quote -

It's also a good selling point for your software....in fact,
it's the SAME selling point.

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Helen P. OPlanick EA wrote:

- quote -

Can they be efiled? Yes. Is there going to be more time in
the return? Well, yes as well, since additional pick up,
put down steps are going to be involved.

Let me be clear--for those that have never efiled, the
process is going to take a *LOT* longer until they get the
hang of the procedures. But even once that is done, there
is still a marginal addition of time to the return.

For instance, there's the simple issue of having to go back
and reinput the date the return was signed once they fax
back the authorization. I don't know about your software
vendor, but mine issues rather regular updates during tax
season to account for various issues, including changes in
law interpretations from DC, etc. (like this week's changed
view of qualified dividends given the proposed technical
corrections).

It is very possible that between the date the client's
return was generated and the date they sign and return the
authorization, my software may have been updated. Any
change in software can produce both intentional and
unintentional changes in the result when I now open it and
generate the "correct" efiled return--so I need to insure
the tax didn't change on either return (assuming efiling
both state and federal).

As well, the mere issue of picking up the return and
processing it is one that didn't need to take place with a
mailed return. All of that time is extra. And, finally,
while for most returns there's not a problem with a
rejection, when it *does* occur it can be a real bear to
straighten out. I find it great fun to convince a client
that their name with social security doesn't agree with what
they think their name is (the "I'm absolutely sure I
changed that 20 years ago and you are just wrong!" comments
are great fun).

I've yet to have the IRS reject a return that would have
caused a real problem with a paper return (the rejections
are a good thing theory). What I have had, however, are a
number of the above type of issues.

As I say, there are a number of advantages to efiling and I
support the concept entirely in theory. But the process
clearly is primarily designed to work when the taxpayer sits
across from the preparer, approves the return and signs all
the paperwork right at that instant. A number of my
clients, looking at a 200 page return, would tell me *I* was
crazy if I thought it was reasonable for them to approve the
return while sitting there in my office, even if I could
create it while they were there.

--
Ed Zollars, CPA
Phoenix, Arizona

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Helen P. OPlanick EA wrote:

- quote -

Of course, efiling *is* data entry <grin> . The whole point
is to keep the IRS from having to do it. Hopefully most of
it is simply being transferred from what would already be
there, but some of the data is added extra.

That's particularly true, as has been discussed before, of
those voluminous printouts from the brokerage firms of
gains/losses. *On the record* (and one member of ETAAC I
know is working hard on that angle and discovering just how
hard it is to get to that point) the IRS will not agree that
you can simply mail in the attachments.

P.S. By on the record, I mean in a form that the IRS can't
disavow in court. So informal statements by efile employees
that "oh yeah, ship it in with the signature form" don't cut
it--especially when getting to the next step (a simple, one
page Revenue Procedure) stops dead in its tracks as soon as
the issue is raised. We continually have gotten informal
assurances, even up to suggesting the binding guidance "is
coming" and then, just as consistently, a flat no comes down
about issuing such binding guidance.

Somebody in IRS legal definitely wants to retain the right
to "hang" the ERO and/or his/her client if those items are
not all entered. Not that they are doing so right now, you
understand, but they want the ability to do so and won't
consider giving an inch on the matter (that is, they won't
define what would be acceptable vs. unacceptable use of
sending the paper in as a supplement).

Now we just have to see if my acquaintance can become enough
of a pest to get IRS legal to give some on the matter...<grin
--
Ed Zollars, CPA
Phoenix, Arizona

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->