Discussion:Power of Attorney
From TaxAlmanac
| Revision as of 17:49, 9 December 2007 Gmikeg (Talk | contribs) (Guess not.......) ← Previous diff |
Revision as of 17:50, 9 December 2007 Gmikeg (Talk | contribs) Next diff → |
||
| Line 90: | Line 90: | ||
| {{ForumReplyPost|UserID=Kevinh5|Date=9 December 2007|Text=<alt>0167, Mike}} | {{ForumReplyPost|UserID=Kevinh5|Date=9 December 2007|Text=<alt>0167, Mike}} | ||
| - | {{ForumReplyPost|UserID=Gmikeg|Date=9 December 2007|Text=TxSrv: By processing matters, doas that exclude transcript(I've only done this as an enrolled preparer with a full POA so far). | + | {{ForumReplyPost|UserID=Gmikeg|Date=9 December 2007|Text=TxSrv: By processing matters, does that exclude transcripts?(I've only done this as an enrolled preparer with full POAs so far). |
| Also | Also | ||
| - | Let's see if this Section thing works... <alt>1234</alt>}} | + | Let's see if this Section thing works... <alt>1234</alt> Guess not..?}} |
| - | + | ||
| - | {{ForumReplyPost|UserID=Gmikeg|Date=9 December 2007|Text=Guess not........?}} | + | |
Revision as of 17:50, 9 December 2007
Discussion Forum Index --> Advanced Tax Questions --> Power of Attorney
Discussion Forum Index --> Tax Questions --> Power of Attorney
| 6 December 2007 | |
| Can anybody answer the question as to why a Power of Attorney, signed by the T/P is required before the IRS can discuss the return with me? If I am the preparer of the return, and I sign the return, I usually know much more about that return than the T/P does. And, since I am a signatory to that return, what is the justification for a signed power of attorney? I can understand the reasoning if the return was NOT one that I had prepared, but I cannot understand the reasoning behind a return that I have prepared! | |
Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said: | 6 December 2007 |
| Anyone could call IRS and say they were you. A mortgage company, a banker, an estranged wife or her lawyer.
If there is a POA, in theory the signature can be compared with that on the return. | |
Ksnoopytax (talk|edits) said: | 6 December 2007 |
| I believe there is a time limit on the ability of a third party preparer to represent the tax preparer before the IRS. Somewhere around one year after the due date of the return not including extensions. It can be frustrating because if I just filed a prior year tax return for a taxpayer as the preparer I don't have access to it using third party authorization. | |
Ksnoopytax (talk|edits) said: | 6 December 2007 |
| oh wait, you are talking without third party authorization. No, I wouldn't want someone speaking on my behalf and having access to records without my specific authorization. | |
| 6 December 2007 | |
| To DerekCPA. Fine, but my question asks WHY does the law say so? What indeed was the thinking behind having the PREPARER, the person who probably kows more about that return than anybody, be required to have signed authorization from the client? It does not preclude the IRS from talking to me!
Death & Taxes. Not valid. My signature is affixed electronically. I do not physically sign a return. IRS still could ask for other identifiers that others would not have, ie CAF number. Ksnoopoytax. I am not talking about the box checked on the 1040. | |
| December 6, 2007 | |
| It's a privacy issue. Think of this: maybe the client doesn't want someone (even if they are the preparer of their return) calling up the service to ask questions without their express written consent. I know I sure wouldn't; I'd want to know why you're calling for one. Number two, perhaps it is something I can take care of myself. Number three, maybe I don't want you to be my tax preparer anymore. Sure makes sense to me there should be a procedure in place to require a signed POA before discussions can take place. Please fill out your profile; thanks. | |
| 6 December 2007 | |
| The law here is section 6103 re disclosure, and IRS minimally requires a written t/p authorization (it need not be 2848) to disclose anything. For example, if IRS made changes to the return as filed, it could not disclose to the preparer what or why the changes were made. That discussion will not be very productive. | |
| 6 December 2007 | |
| Quirk review Publication 947 (5/2004), Practice Before the IRS and Power of Attorney. You will get your answear. | |
| 6 December 2007 | |
| BEGooding As a signatory to the return, I would only be entitled to information regarding that return and only that return. The IRS certainly isn't precluded from demanding information from me! And they don't need a signed POA from the client! Numbe two, if is something that you could take care of yourself, fine, I don't see the problem. Thirdly, perhaps you don't want me as your tax preparer anymore. Again, I say, that still doesn't perclude the IRS from talking to me, does it?
TxSRV Interesting! Finally, a referenced source! However, any changes on the return still could indeed affect me. ie. preoparer penalties etc. I would certainly want to know! | |
Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said: | 7 December 2007 |
| You are permitted to relay information to IRS to assist them in processing or correcting the return, but they cannot discuss the matter with you. Several times I have done this, e.g., a check has been posted under the spouse's SS#, so I might call and give them that information. They can give me no information in return because it has not been authorized.
As a speaker at a seminar said today about privacy, sometimes banks call her for a copy of a return, so she replies to the banker, "who is your accountant? I'd like to call him to get a copy of your return." | |
| 7 December 2007 | |
| Mauro has the answer in Pub 947. It's because the authorization is included with the power to "represent", not just discuss. And with that power comes some other authorizations. Still, seems that as a signatory to the return, you should be entitled to some rights other than a liability for penalty! At least discussion should be allowed. Sic. must be one of them lawyer things! | |
| 7 December 2007 | |
| Write your Senators and Representatives if you would like a law changed....good luck | |
Bottom Line (talk|edits) said: | 8 December 2007 |
| I agree. It drives me nuts too. I could solve problems and help both the client and the IRS with the issue if I could just talk with the IRS. Unfortunately - them's the rules! | |
| 8 December 2007 | |
| Quirk, I don't understand many of your comments. For example to state that the IRS could simply require that you just give your CAF number makes no sense. I could give my CAF number on a client that I no longer represent or for anyone for whom I happen to know the SSN or EIN. I spoke to two people yesterday that may or may not hire me. In both cases they faxed me the most recent IRS notices they received. By your statement, I could just call the IRS and have complete access to their account. The taxpayer MUST give written consent otherwise no one has anyway of verifying that you have legal authorization to discuss the case with the IRS. Is it really that difficult to get a client to sign a 2848? If they are unable or unwilling to do so, you don't represent them.
And you can always give IRS information about anything without a POA on file. The difference is that IRS can't give information to you. | |
| 8 December 2007 | |
| Skasselea Well, unfortunately you miss the point. Completely. As a SIGNATORY to the return, I indeed have an interest and a responsibility to that specific return! I am only talking about returns for which I am the signatory. As the signatory, I too, am responsible and do have a degree of liability for what goes on that return. It seems utterly silly, that I should be denied information from the IRS about data that I entered into the return simply because I don't have permission from the Taxpayer! I agree that the POA should be required for any other person, but not for the person who prepared and signed the return! Unfortunately, the legal beagles have managed to tie the informational authorization to the power to represent and thereby precludes the ability for the IRS to separate one from the other.
In regard to your statement that no one has authorization to access an account without authorization, I submit that my authorization should come from the fact that I have affixed my name to the return as the preparer! Just as the Taxpayer did! Remember. I am only talking about returns that I personally have prepared and signed! | |
Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said: | 8 December 2007 |
| Two new clients came to me in the last two months. Both are flight attendants who had their returns done by the same person. They tell me all of their co-workers who used this man are being audited. I had each sign a POA so I could represent them. It is obvious to me that this man used a cookie-cutter approach to these returns....all numbers but meals are essentially the same....meals being different because he asked the number of nights they'd spent out of town.
By your reasoning, I will be trying to represent them while this man who signed the return could also be calling IRS and talking to the auditors, and they to him. | |
| 8 December 2007 | |
| Quirk, it seems to come down to the rights of the taxpayer superceding the rights of the preparer. | |
| 8 December 2007 | |
| Death and Taxes So? Your point being? The man who signed the return still was the one who signed the return was he not? Should he not be entitled to know what the IRS is saying about his work? Notice that I did not say that he should or could represent them without their approval. That, I would object to. I simply don't agree that after I have prepared, entered and signed a return, that it should suddenly become a secret to me! Get it? Otherwise, what possible reason is there for me to even sign a return other than to expose myself to liability for not having signed the return or for whatever other error could be visited upon me! | |
| 9 December 2007 | |
| "The man who signed the return still was the one who signed the return was he not? Should he not be entitled to know what the IRS is saying about his work?"
Yes...but the IRS cannot readily draw a distinction between a preparer's work and tax return information barred from disclosure under 6103 (in lieu of t/p authorization). They do not know exactly what your work entailed. You have to appreciate this from the viewpoint of the IRS worker. It's bad enough to deal with complex law and procedures, in context of an adversary relationship, but let's just add the ability to "think on one's feet" so as not to say something which is an unauthorized disclosure (which can subject the IRS worker to sanctions). A POA or TIA solves all this for IRS. | |
| 9 December 2007 | |
| This is merely a third-party/preparer issue. First, 1040 Returns filed since TY 2005 DO NOT require a physical signature; the computer can just print it on the form, and it counts as a legal preparer's signature, also if preparer did NOT sign return, (like he didn't get paid), he can still discuss it with the IRS as long as the third-party box is checked. Second: Kevin, I wasn't aware of any one-year/third-party limit on speaking with the IRS, do you have a cite on this one, please? Third: (which should have been first) If the third party box is checked, the practitioner most definitely has the right to discuss the return with the IRS, but not represent TP, if un-enrolled, 31 CFR Sec. 10.7(c)(1)(viii). NO POA or TIA is required for the specific tax year. (OK, who wants to knock my ass down a notch or two here!!...lol) | |
Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said: | 9 December 2007 |
| This is what I don't understand here....if the poster is so adamant about talking to IRS, why doesn't he have the taxpayer check the box to authorize such disclosure on the return itself. The rules for this are governed by Sec. 6103(c) and Reg. 301.6103(c)-1. IRS will happily talk to him, though he cannot perform many other actions. Publication 947 spells this out.
Note too, that almost any name can appear in that block.....Aunt Jean, Uncle Bill, the next door neighbor as long as the rest of the information is provided.. In my new clients' cases, they had the chance to hire the preparer's brother (who is a CPA, oh boy!!!!!!) for a fee in excess of the return. They turned him down and want to have nothing to do with him. I would not want this man calling IRS and giving 'his side' of the matter. He is an incompetent preparer who foisted himself on these people by being one of them (he was also a flight attendant) claiming to have a computer program that would do all the work. | |
| 9 December 2007 | |
| "Checking the box" re 3rd party designee on 1040 limits IRS disclosure/discussion to only processing matters. A time limit on that would be rather moot. | |
| 9 December 2007 | |
| How do I get that little Section thing to work. I just fixed my cite in the earlier post, and I thought BLUE Sec. BUTTON above did that, but it creates a hyperlink instead of the symbol! And I thought I was a geek... | |
| 9 December 2007 | |
| TxSrv: By processing matters, does that exclude transcripts?(I've only done this as an enrolled preparer with full POAs so far).
Also Let's see if this Section thing works... <alt>1234</alt> Guess not..? | |
