- quote -


- quote -

I'd agree with that concern as well as the IRS's mail handling machinery,
thin & flexible plastic type would flow through the machinery with less
chance of damage to the article.

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

Stuart A. Bronstein wrote:
- quote -

And I never said or intimated there is one. Probably should have
labeled it "personal opinion."

However, just one paper clip could push th eweight over another ounce
which would then cost another 13 cents in postage.
AND waste a paper clip.

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. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

Harlan Lunsford wrote:

- quote -



The story I assimilated from somewhere in the past, is that various
little bits of metal in strange shapes, embedded amongst the sheaves of
paper stuffed inside an envelope, might screw up the postmarking
machinery at USPS. I suppose that's no longer true, any more than
checks requiring special magnetic ink in the RTN/DAN area for proper
scanning.

-Mark Bole

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

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

- quote -

I wasn't able to find a postal regulation that talked about paper clips
one way or the other.

Stu

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

- quote -

I'm guessing the Postal Inspector General has more pressing matters to
investigate & prosecute. ;-)

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

Taxmanhog wrote:
- quote -


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. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

On Feb 27, 8:36*pm, kam...[at]panix.com (Arthur Kamlet) wrote:
- quote -

Aha!

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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 <7ddf21a2-3eba-4c9b-a9bd-6de1460ec1eb[at]v38g2000yqb.googlegroups.com> ,
hr(bob) hofmann[at]att.net <hrhofmann[at]att.net> wrote:
- quote -


The 1040-V serves as a stand-alone "form" for sending in the amount
due, without sending in the tax return. Especially good for e-filers.
--


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 Feb 24, 6:25*pm, "Taxmanhog" <taxman...[at]comcast.net> wrote:
- quote -

Exactly what pupose does the 1040V serve???

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

- quote -


- quote -

I like Rich's answer, but if you plan to mail it in, paper clip is best.

Voucher & check in front of page one, -DO NOT- bury it under other pages of
the return.

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

Salmon Egg <SalmonEgg[at]sbcglobal.net> writes:

- quote -

Neither. Use EFTPS (https://www.eftps.gov/eftps/)
and don't use checks at all.

--
Rich Carreiro rlc-news[at]rlcarr.com

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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 <gnvhat$lnt$1[at]reader.motzarella.org> ,
"Taxmanhog" <taxmanhog[at]comcast.net> wrote:

- quote -

So should I attach the check or not? How?

Bill

--
Private Profit; Public Poop! Avoid collateral windfall!

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

- quote -

Unfortunately, this does happen, In the good old days I worked in a service
center keying in the data from the remit's, then eying the full data on the
return & part of the year reviewing returns for under reported income.



I've told this story before (here) but it's worth repeating. All night long
my shift ran 4:30 pm to 3:00 we would be punching data 100 folks working a
fantastic choreography



When returns with remit are received, they are loose batched, in trays
depending on the density of the returns, there could be as many as 600+
returns in each tray, with the checks one on top of another.



The original entry clerks would start a batch, loading up a block of 100
returns & related remits (this was before the advent of 1040v) The OE
operators plugged along block after block until an entire BATCH tray loaded
with many blocks was completed.



These trays would be loaded onto carts by expeditors; they monitored the
BATCH carts until it was complete.



The cart moved to the other side of the room to the KEY VERIFYERS (KV's),
who in turn took an entire tray of blocks to their KV workstations, a large
remittance processing machine with computer terminal, register printer &
document serializer.



The data was key-match verified, (replicate stroke by stroke what the OE
input in sequence from document 00 to document 99. (100)



During this process, usually at the OE work station a small % of checks
become separated from the associate return, rather than dig looking fo r the
return, the loose checks & returns w/o remit's were set aside and later
processed as separate documents, eventually the loose check data got posted
at about the same time the loose returns with -missing- remit's were posted,
not always though.



In rare situations the missing check remained -LOST- in the Paper Mountains
of returns already processed and on the way to 3 year retention center
(FILES).



About a year or so later, a percentage of returns fail to pass muster in the
under reporter analysis system, those paper returns are picked out FILES and
batched, for examiners to review. On occasion the long lost STALE REMIT's
turn up, these payments are not cashed due to their age. Some STALE REMIT's
are never found.



Now that we have taxpayer or software prepared posting vouchers the error
frequency is drastically reduced, but the general process is the same and
still subject to errors.

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

With the recent excgange over Certified Mail or Certificate of Mailing I
wish to report one bad experience with payment checks.

Instructions say not to attach payments to the return. While I no longer
staple my check to the return, I do attach with a paper clip whether the
IRS likes it or not.

One time, using either mail without proof of mailing, or a low level
proof, I sent payment without the check attached. My bank statement came
soon after without the IRS check being cleared. That was still the case
with the next statement. I called the IRS of my own volition to verify
that my return had been received. They did a search for the check and
could not find it.

A short time later, the IRS asked me to send them the payment plus
penalties. I sent them another check and a polite note saying that I
should not have to pay the penalty. I pointed out that I had reported
that the check had not cleared before being notified by the IRS. They
agreed.

I have heard of horror stories with the IRS dealings, but I have never
had problems with them of that nature. Sometimes they have sent me
refunds I did not expect for reasons I do not understand. Similarly,
they have sent me bills that sometimes I do not understand. If it is not
much, I do not try to fight it. I do not try to chisel on my taxes.

These days, various tax agencies cash checks promptly. With electronic
banking it is easy to find out if the check has cleared. In many cases
that makes proof of mailing unnecessary.

Bill

--
Private Profit; Public Poop! Avoid collateral windfall!

--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << 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. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >