- quote -

One reason that I, and probably a few others, answer
questions in that manner is that we are trying to get the
questioner to think for him/herself. One of the more
frequent question/answer sets in this regard is the "My
spouse & I want to contribute to our IRA, what is the
limit?" Such a question is nearly always answered in such a
way to point out that the I in IRA stands for individual.

Gary
Figure X out which X letters to remove to X e-mail me.

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

David Woods, EA wrote:
- quote -

Absolutely. But the tax systems can seem so illogical at
times, I can understand why someone might come up with
something like that.

Remember - if assessment of taxes was all based on common
sense, nobody would need tax professionals.

Stu

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

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

- quote -

Well, try reading all the messages in the thread. Perhaps
you will get a different impression of the replies, perhaps
not.

--
To reply to me directly, remove the XXX characters from my
email address.

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

Vic Dura wrote:

- quote -

Well, I don't know how snide this is, but when I read your
reply to John Fisher's reply to the OP, I fail to see
anything he said that can be construed as snide. If you
want to apologize, then do so to John.

ChEAr$,
Harlan Lunsford, EA n LA

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

"Vic Dura" <vpdura[at]XXXhiwaay.net> wrote:

Snip

- quote -

Bet on it. The question of saying someone else should get
he 1099 so another person can save taxes is so illogical not
to mention patently and obviously wrong....

--
David M. Woods, EA
Woods Financial Services
Norwood, MA 02062
www.woods-financial.com

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

Vic Dura wrote:

- quote -

Two real problems here.

First, responses on usenet and other electronic discussion
groups tend to *seem* more brusque than posters generally
intend them to be. A lot of what usually takes place in a
face to face communication session, or even a voice phone
call, isn't available here--so often the reader will take
something more harshly than it was intended, or a remark
will read harsher than it should be taken.

Second, because this is a group frequented by professionals
and used for professional to professional communication,
that kind of "in the loop" response is going to take place.
And it's difficult to phrase an answer to the particular
question that isn't either short and appears harsh (a
straight "no" can easily be read to suggest the answer is so
obvious it isn't worthy of discussion--though in this case
it is almost certainly the correct answer) or having to
attach an explanation that either seems to imply a
fraudulent intent (the assignment of income cases tend to
read that way) or goes even further in suggesting the poster
is clueless.

In a true face to face interaction, I'd probably give the no
answer and then read the client to see which direction I
should go next. The client's response would tell me if:

a) the client simply wanted the answer and no is good enough;

b) the client is interested in the why and will be satisfied
by a brief discussion of the "assignment of income" concept;

c) the client doesn't particularly care about the legality
and his real question was "will I be caught if I do it?"--in
which case he's likely a former client <grin> .

The problem on usenet is that you can't know which way the
poster views the question and there's no way to get
feedback. As well, since no one is paid for the answer,
sometimes the straight "no" is done simply because it's the
most time efficient response.

Similarly, those that go to explain do so in a time
efficient manner--so their explanation is short and appears
terse. And a short explanation of assignment of income is
likely to appear to imply fraudulent intent by indicating
that the person that earned the income has to report it, and
it cannot be "moved" to another person for a tax benefit.

I would also note this is a more general issue for usenet as
a whole--posters to usenet need to have somewhat "thick
skins" since this type of response is very likely only any
issue from the experts who post in whatever field you are
discussing. As noted, it's more the nature of the medium.
And it's an awful lot better here on this moderated group
than you'll get in an unmoderated group--in those groups
there are people that intentionally post insulting replies
just to get things stirred up.

--
Ed Zollars, CPA
Phoenix, Arizona

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

- quote -

I think this is another example of a lay person coming here
with what is to him a legitimate tax question, and getting
several snide and condescending remarks as if he were either
a brain-dead moron or a tax-cheat soliciting criminal
collusion.

IMO this is a growing problem here, particularly with a
select few "regular" posters. Perhaps you folks are working
too hard. As a non-pro, I'm probably a bit over-sensitive.
Nevertheless, as a VITA/TCE volunteer during tax season, I
would never consider the snide remarks I see here as
appropriate when working with one of the walk-ins. No matter
what I personally think.

I would like to urge you pros to cut these folks a little
slack. The fact that they come here to ask a question
indicates to me that they are making an effort to handle
what are to them some very complex and confusing issues.

IMO you ought to give them the benefit of the doubt;
especially since most of you pros can't even agree on what
time it is much less a tax issue. (I use this as an example
of tax-issue complexity, not your competence)

My apologies for venting. All of you really provide a much
needed public service and I appreciate it; but I felt that
this really needed to be said.

Now you can direct your snide remarks to me.

--
To reply to me directly, remove the XXX characters from my
email address.

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

"Wins"
<wcc97[at]yahoo.com> wrote:

- quote -

The legality of it is not a tax issue, its a legal issue. The tax answer
is, it should be hers. You can't assign income.

--
David M. Woods, EA, ChFC, CLU
Woods Financial Services
Norwood, MA 02062
www.woods-financial.com

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

wcc97[at]yahoo.com (Wins) writes:

- quote -

Of course not.

Phil Marti
Topeka, KS

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

- quote -

No & No

Kate, EA in PA

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

Wins wrote:

- quote -

Absolutely NOT! Nuff said.

ChEAr$,
Harlan Lunsford, EA n LA

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

- quote -

'Not unless you performed the work necessary to produce the income, contracted
to perform a service (along with your spouse) are in business as a partnership
and your agreement spells out
the percentage of distributions.(profit & loss). Another possibility is that
you may have been an employee, sub-contractor, or were compensated (somehow) as
a non-employee. You then would pay the tax and self-employment tax on the net
income from this transaction. In any case, if your wife was the only one
contracted to perform the service, the insurance company would have no license
to pay anyone other than your wife. She might then be responsible for paying
you for your services.

"Jack" - John H. Fisher - TaxService[at]aol.com
Philadelphia, Pa - Atlantic City, NJ - West Wildwood, NJ
My Newsgroups & Boards at: http://members.aol.com/TaxService/index.html

Where Ignorance is bliss, 'tis folly to be wise!=

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

- quote -

Did you win it or did she?

- quote -

Get serious, what do you think?
Helen, EA in PA
50 miles, 3 days, 1 cause - Multiple Sclerosis Challenge Walk for the Cure
October 1 to October 3, 2004
Donate on-line at www.msandyou.org

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

My wife recently won a settlement for a client. The
insurance company is paying out the settlement and can make
multiple checks.

My question. Is it possible to have the insurance company
make the check out to me instead of my wife so that I can
claim the income under my SSN?

Is that legal?

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