In article <kurtullman-D374E3.10352007012008[at]70-3-168-216.area5.spcsdns.net> ,
Kurt Ullman <kurtullman[at]yahoo.com> wrote:

- quote -

Don't you mean "more than"?

Seth

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

Bill wrote:
- quote -


--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

In article <8711-47824475-2666[at]storefull-3111.bay.webtv.net> ,
an_ordinary_guy_158[at]hotmail.com (Bill) wrote:

- quote -

From my experience about the only time they even do a letter is if
your 1099s add up to less than you stated on your taxes. In 20+ years of
small bizzing, I can't think of a time that I actually got 1099s from
all of my clients, probably reducing the audit possibility even further.

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

Bill wrote:
- quote -

Matter of fact, I have never seen a CP2000 letter on just such a
situation, even for a schedule c filer.

ChEAr$,
Harlan Lunsford, EA n LA

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

Janie[at]nospam.com.invalid (Janie) posted:

- quote -

Yes. If it were questioned, it would probably be a routine letter
inquiry, easily answered as Art suggested. Don't sweat the small stuff.

In fact, unless you have major discrepancies, audits are not to be
feared, based on small items like this.

Bill

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

Arthur Kamlet wrote:
- quote -

Thanks, Art. I guess I'm a little afraid that the discrepancy will
trigger an audit. Am I being needlessly paranoid?

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

In article <geydnfZDR7ppjxzanZ2dnUVZ_jKdnZ2d[at]rcn.net> ,
Janie <Janie[at]nospam.com.invalid> wrote:
- quote -


If you did not receive it until 2008 then for you it is 2008 income.


Just report it as received, and if the IRS should ever ask, tell
then what happened.
--


ArtKamlet at a o l dot c o m Columbus OH K2PZH

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

On January 4, 2008, I received a check from a client dated 12/31/07.
The client will include this amount on the 2007 1099 he files with the
IRS. However, since I am on a calendar year accounting system, it is
income I received in 2008.

Should I report it on my 2007 or 2008 taxes? And if on my 2008 taxes,
will such a conflict with the amount on my 1099 and the amount on my
Schedule C cause the IRS to question/audit me?

Thanks.

Janie

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >