Discussion:California Tax Payments

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

Jump to: navigation, search

Discussion Forum Index --> Basic Tax Questions --> California Tax Payments


Discussion Forum Index --> Tax Questions --> California Tax Payments

CPASue (talk|edits) said:

30 July 2009
I have a young tax client who, I guess, does not read. I sent him his 2008 LLC tax return indicating $3300 was due [to California] with the return. I also enclosed vouchers for 2009. Seems he enclosed one of the vouchers in the envelope with the return and the FTB credited his 2008 balance due payment as an estimated payment for 2009. Of course now his gets a notice for the 2008 balance due with interest and penalties. He called the FTB and they told him "by law" they cannot apply his payment to the balance due and he needs to pay up. Any thoughts on this?
 Thanks
         Sue

Michaelstar (talk|edits) said:

30 July 2009
I have not yet ever had such a problem - call the tax practitioner line at 916-845-7057 as ask if you can resolve the problem. Please post back on your results.

CPASue (talk|edits) said:

30 July 2009
Will do, thanks for the suggestion.
        Sue

Riley2 (talk|edits) said:

30 July 2009
The FTB is correct about this. Estimated tax payments cannot be re-directed.

Michaelstar (talk|edits) said:

30 July 2009
Riley2 - I guess we do not know enough really based on the post but if the voucher enclosed by mistake is for a different amount than the $3,300 paid and the voucher was included by mistake as noted, then the $3,300 payment made would not really have been an estimated tax payment. Another item that would be helpful to know is if there were any notations made by the t/p on the check as to year the payment applied. If that was the case and the FTB ignored a 2008 notation and applied it to 2009, again I think we should also have room to move here. Any comments or additional ideas?

KatieJ (talk|edits) said:

3 August 2009
I agree with Michael -- it's worth asking if the mistake was partially the FTB's. However, be warned -- I hear from former colleagues that the FTB has been unusually hard to work with in recent months. No doubt the budget situation, which makes state employees understandably grumpy, has something to do with it.

CPASue (talk|edits) said:

5 August 2009
Well folks I did what was suggested and after a 15 minute wait which was not bad compared the IRS 45 minute wait I was assisted very professionally by the FTB.

I had a couple of things going for me. Tax returns and payments go one place, estimated payments and vouchers go to another address. So the fact that the client had a return with a balance due of 3300 a loose check for 3300 and a voucher for 800 did not make it clear what the proper application would be. The FTB said they would move the payment back to 2008 BUT with the new 10% penalty on late estimates the client would owe more for not paying the 2009 estimates timely since he did not pay any. We left them where they were.

I can comment on the FTB in general is crazy, overworked, grouchy, inefficient. I do think everybody is just doing the best they can do in line with their agency philosophy which is very aggressive coupled with our state's budget problems. We do not have a kinder, gentler FTB, never have been, never will. But I must say that the person who helped me was very professional, willing to work with me and went beyond by advising me of the potential downside of my request. This matter was successfully resolved. And I thank the poster who suggested this.

      Sue

To join in on this discussion, you must first log in.
Personal tools