Ah Jim – thanks for your reply, and I do look forward to hearing from you later. The practitioners dilemma – too busy, not enough time, too tired…. 
Maybe time for a change of vocation? I am in my third – (1) industry 15 years including training; (2) CPA public practice 17 years including a divorce; and (3) teaching, writing, mentoring, small business consulting – no overheads to speak of, better hourly rate than practice, a free library, can chose whether i live by the sea or in the city … no ulcers, plenty of time, not tired.
I’m working on that. Many professionals I have studied have had multiple vocations, but the last is often inebriation at the farm or the seaside home.
I quit the sauce in 1982 – weekend before my 41st birthday. I did have a few ounces of champagne at my daughter’s wedding a couple of years ago. What I am doing now I can do until I drop, and then it will not be from exhaustion…and as long as they pout the Tax legislation and my notebook into the coffin, I will be just fine. Retirement is a change of activity – not a cessation of activity; a change of pace by choice and not from a heart attack or stroke.
I agree. Stay alive and well Jim! The profession needs people like you, and mentors like you.
Thanks for the kind words. At some stage I intend to follow this up, and someone in this group may be interested in such a study in US. It highlights a glaring deficiency in some of us at the ‘essential’ level. Maybe it can be explained away culturally, and maybe it is more deep-seated than that.
I’m certainly interested. Maybe someone has some comments or has made their own observations – the real issue is that this is NOT restricted to any one country. Does the profession attract the ‘wrong type’ of person? Is our education system at fault? There is a reason …
I agree that "there is a reason". Before we can answer your two extremely cogent questions, we need to deal with the "expectation gap". Is the outside accountant responsible for the detection and reporting of fraud, most particularly with regards to public companies? If the answer to my question is yes, then I would suggest that the answer to yours are also yes. If the answer is no, I would suggest that the answer to yours is also no, and that the consuming public is exercising it’s ultimate judgment in deeming us no longer relevant. I’m hoping that by keeping this short we will get more comments from others. — Jim Hudspeth, CFE, CPA http://survivalworks.com
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – At some stage I intend to follow this up, and someone in this group may be interested in such a study in US. It highlights a glaring deficiency in some of us at the ‘essential’ level. Maybe it can be explained away culturally, and maybe it is more deep-seated than that. Maybe someone has some comments or has made their own observations – the real issue is that this is NOT restricted to any one country. Does the profession attract the ‘wrong type’ of person? Is our education system at fault? There is a reason … Peter French PhD CMA Australia
Hi Peter, Haven’t seen you here in a while. Welcome back. Your comments and questions are of great interest to me, however I am too tired at the moment to come up with anything worth reading. I will comment further soon. Best regards, Jim Hudspeth
Ah Jim – thanks for your reply, and I do look forward to hearing from you later. The practitioners dilemma – too busy, not enough time, too tired…. Maybe time for a change of vocation? I am in my third – (1) industry 15 years including training; (2) CPA public practice 17 years including a divorce; and (3) teaching, writing, mentoring, small business consulting – no overheads to speak of, better hourly rate than practice, a free library, can chose whether i live by the sea or in the city … no ulcers, plenty of time, not tired. Many professionals I have studied have had multiple vocations, but the last is often inebriation at the farm or the seaside home. What I am doing now I can do until I drop, and then it will not be from exhaustion…and as long as they pout the Tax legislation and my notebook into the coffin, I will be just fine. Retirement is a change of activity – not a cessation of activity; a change of pace by choice and not from a heart attack or stroke. Stay alive and well Jim! The profession needs people like you, and mentors like you. Peter
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – At some stage I intend to follow this up, and someone in this group may be interested in such a study in US. It highlights a glaring deficiency in some of us at the ‘essential’ level. Maybe it can be explained away culturally, and maybe it is more deep-seated than that. Maybe someone has some comments or has made their own observations – the real issue is that this is NOT restricted to any one country. Does the profession attract the ‘wrong type’ of person? Is our education system at fault? There is a reason … Peter French PhD CMA Australia Hi Peter, Haven’t seen you here in a while. Welcome back. Your comments and questions are of great interest to me, however I am too tired at the moment to come up with anything worth reading. I will comment further soon. Best regards, Jim Hudspeth
KPMG have knocked back taking in/over Andersen Australia. They are going with E&Y. The problem blocking any ‘merger’ is that we have an insurance group – HIH – that has crashed creating havoc in the local business and industry areas – professional indemnity, builders guarantee/warranty, general risk – and KPMG are the liquidators. There is a strong possibility that KPMG will seek the ‘recover’ from those who are ‘Andersen’ here. If the case wasn’t true, it could be humorous in parts. So you do not have it on your own, and accountants in US and Oz are not necessarily different in ethics or perspective. In 1990/1 when I did my MAcc [post professional research, not professional qualifying degree] I looked at some issues in financial reporting. One thing I looked at was the incidence of ‘qualified’ [conditional] audit reports. In 10 years i could not find one that had been issued where the company had paid fees in addition to auditing fees, to the accountants. There were qualified reports, but in these cases only auditing fees were paid. This covered the heady 1980’s, but obviously the practice became ‘habitual’? I did further research with accountants, lawyers, and company directors. the purpose was to gauge the degree of compliance with ethics, legal requirements and professional standards, in accounting and publishing external financial statements by public [listed] companies. My research centred on Australia and New Zealand in the context of our trade agreement. The responses form both countries showed a ‘compliance’ of almost 90% with ethics, the law, and accounting standards. A further ]embedded] question was posed – ‘…do you consider published financial statements are reliable/suitable for decision making purposes?…’ In one country I got a 90% positive response, and in the other a 19% positive response. At some stage I intend to follow this up, and someone in this group may be interested in such a study in US. It highlights a glaring deficiency in some of us at the ‘essential’ level. Maybe it can be explained away culturally, and maybe it is more deep-seated than that. Maybe someone has some comments or has made their own observations – the real issue is that this is NOT restricted to any one country. Does the profession attract the ‘wrong type’ of person? Is our education system at fault? There is a reason … Peter French PhD CMA Australia
May I recommend you study instances of disclaimers, if you find any? It has amazed me over the years to see how rarely certifying auditors issue disclaimers although this instrument is part of the official repertoire. Auditees often apply fee pressure on auditors which make a thorough audit impossible. e. g.: how often and meticulously do auditors take statistical samples these days? IMHO one should be seeing many more disclaimers than one does. A. Lucien Meyers, CIA, CMA — If you receive this by error, please delete it and inform the sender. PGP key fingerprint=F1C0 D9AE 1B18 1405 4DFA B4CC 6DC7 FF78 C76E FB15 To Big Brother Echelon from "spook": Legion of Doom smuggle cracking Clinton domestic disruption Delta Force
Can someone tell me why Quickbooks likes to log onto the internet at random moments? I installed a firewall and it has stopped QBPro 2001 from accessing the net several times while I was not using the program. This seems quite strange to me. –Chris
Can someone tell me why Quickbooks likes to log onto the internet at random moments? I installed a firewall and it has stopped QBPro 2001 from accessing the net several times while I was not using the program. This seems quite strange to me.
QB uses a program from Marimba called Castanet to handle updates. It handles web updates of the program. Unfortunately, it stays in memory after QB shuts down, as you can readily confirm with the W2000 Task Manager under processes. You can turn off automatic updates in QB2001 and later versions of QB 2000. Firewall users report that it sends only your QB version and basic configuration information. However, if Intuit decided to switch Marimba versions tomorrow it could send all information on your hard disk. Mike Block – Tax Cut CPA #1 QuickBooks Top Tester FREE NetLedger accounting & 462p QB book,error codes,shortcuts 954-566-7540 120+ QB Add-ons http://blocktax.com/
I used to have a great little piece of software that was a simple graph, showing weight lost each day and a target date for loss and then after I reinstalled my Windows ME, the program (which I’d backed up) would no longer install. Does anyone know of a similar program which I could download? I’d be very grateful for your help!
I used to have a great little piece of software that was a simple graph, showing weight lost each day and a target date for loss and then after I reinstalled my Windows ME, the program (which I’d backed up) would no longer install. Does anyone know of a similar program which I could download? I’d be very grateful for your help!
can’t help you with the proggie but just wanted to point out the obvious — if you have MS excel, you can just make a table with a graph yourself. it’s fun and you have a lot of options regarding the visual output. it also exports to web pages. here’s mine (kinda old but you get the idea): http://zarathustra.pentragon.net/temp/tummy.htm nina 210/153/140
I used to have a great little piece of software that was a simple graph, showing weight lost each day and a target date for loss and then after I reinstalled my Windows ME, the program (which I’d backed up) would no longer install. Does anyone know of a similar program which I could download? I’d be very grateful for your help!
If you register at www.fitday.com, you can input your weight, and a goal weight/date, and access the kind of graph you describe. Mardi — To reply by e-mail, please replace <NOSPAM with <NYCAP.rr. But not to send me spam! I never requested your "report," and I’m not interested in your pyramid scheme which, by the way, is NOT legal!
Was this a shareware program? Perhaps they have a newer version that works with ME? What is the name of the program? — Melissa 140/122/118
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I used to have a great little piece of software that was a simple graph, showing weight lost each day and a target date for loss and then after I reinstalled my Windows ME, the program (which I’d backed up) would no longer install. Does anyone know of a similar program which I could download? I’d be very grateful for your help!
Thank you all for the input! I cannot remember the name of the program exactly but the exe was called dtk.exe and it was made by a company named Softrak who I can no longer find on the Web. I don’t have Excel on my computer but that is a good idea! Thanks!
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Was this a shareware program? Perhaps they have a newer version that works with ME? What is the name of the program? — Melissa 140/122/118 I used to have a great little piece of software that was a simple graph, showing weight lost each day and a target date for loss and then after I reinstalled my Windows ME, the program (which I’d backed up) would no longer install. Does anyone know of a similar program which I could download? I’d be very grateful for your help!
See if you can find anything here: http://download.cnet.com/downloads/1,10150,0-10001-103-0-1-7,00.html?… h&qt=weight+loss&cn=&ca=10001
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I used to have a great little piece of software that was a simple graph, showing weight lost each day and a target date for loss and then after I reinstalled my Windows ME, the program (which I’d backed up) would no longer install. Does anyone know of a similar program which I could download? I’d be very grateful for your help!
well I found a few softrak websites… they look like accounting things. One is www.softrak.com another is.. www.stepwise.com/softrak. I did a google search for softrak and these are only two of the ones I found. Not sure exactly what the company is so I don’t know if it’s them. But try the google search and sort through.. Perhaps you will find it there.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Thank you all for the input! I cannot remember the name of the program exactly but the exe was called dtk.exe and it was made by a company named Softrak who I can no longer find on the Web. I don’t have Excel on my computer but that is a good idea! Thanks! Was this a shareware program? Perhaps they have a newer version that works with ME? What is the name of the program? — Melissa 140/122/118 I used to have a great little piece of software that was a simple graph, showing weight lost each day and a target date for loss and then after I reinstalled my Windows ME, the program (which I’d backed up) would no longer install. Does anyone know of a similar program which I could download? I’d be very grateful for your help!
Now you have installed ZA, you could benefit by using Zonelog Analyzer, http://zonelog.co.uk . Very helpful for using the ZA log and interpreting the info therein. Cheers, Mike
Intuit doesn’t own Quicken Lawyer. It is owned by Parsons which happens to be owned by Broderbund, which used to be owned by Mattel. Check your facts about which company owns what before blasting a company. It really hurts your credibility as far as I am concerned!
What FACT is wrong. He never said that Intuit owned it. It looks like you need to read the message before responding. Also you missed one "used to be". The first owner ship of Parsons, outside of the founder, was INTUIT. Bill biz.comp.accounting moderator (mike block) note: I will post this because it may be criticizing me and I do not censor that. For the record, I will not allow anonymous posts in the future. Those posting this way have no credibility. It is stupid for Quicken to allow someone using their name to commit an offense worse than many crimes. Unless they make every effort to promptly stop it they are effectively guilty of complicity and deserve public sanctions.
Mike block again: Private emails quickly resolved differences between myself & Idon’tknow. Now we should verify the facts and then hang the program owner AND the company that let them use the name Quicken.
Intuit doesn’t own Quicken Lawyer. It is owned by Parsons which happens to be owned by Broderbund, which used to be owned by Mattel. Check your facts about which company owns what before blasting a company. It really hurts your credibility as far as I am concerned! biz.comp.accounting moderator (mike block) note: I will post this because it may be criticizing me and I do not censor that. For the record, I will not allow anonymous posts in the future. Those posting this way have no credibility. It is stupid for Quicken to allow someone using their name to commit an offense worse than many crimes. Unless they make every effort to promptly stop it they are effectively guilty of complicity and deserve public sanctions.
brodcast is Broderbund Software/Mattel Software’s implementation of the Marimba technology. The software in Question is actually put out by Mattel, Inc. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – We keep hearing QB is only checking for updates and does not send anything beyond version number. I am going to update my Quicken Lawyer to verify this. If this is true, it will be something Intuit long regrets. mike block QuickBooks does the same thing. Sorry bastards. The teqnique is slightly different – but just as objectionable. Mike |I used Quicken lawyer today. I opened Zonealarm, and set it to stop all |traffic. |When I got done using it (Quicken), Zonealarm came up, there it was, |calling |in to try to pass the info back to a site. Ha ! Ha !, I used Adware, |deleted the bad stuff out, then turned it back on. I looked at what it |was |going to send them. EVERYTHING I had put in a LIVING WILL I made out, |plus |the equipment I was running, and on and on. | It executes a program called dss/agent, and tells windows (in the |Register), to run it. It calls in using 24.131.1.9 and it’s called |Brodcast background agent (the o has a line through it) when it came up |in |Zonealarm. The address in the Register is |www.brodcast.net/per/DSS/querySS.cgi |Yes the letters are capital letters. | |The next time you use it, it re-writes this to the register again to |HKEY_LOCAL_Machinesoftwarebroderbund softwaredss |It executes dssagent.exe | |When you use it, it puts it inside Quicken, under a Folder called |Mattel, |which is site on the net that sells software. But I bought mine from |Parsons. | | |Does anyone know if there are similar "problems" with other Intuit |software? Thanks. | |Jim Mike Block, Tax Fighting C.P.A. World’s #1 QuickBooks Top Tester FREE NetLedger consult refer #10260 FREE 462p QB book/error codes/ 80 QB add-ons http://blocktax.com/
We keep hearing QB is only checking for updates and does not send anything beyond version number. I am going to update my Quicken Lawyer to verify this. If this is true, it will be something Intuit long regrets. mike block – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – QuickBooks does the same thing. Sorry bastards. The teqnique is slightly different – but just as objectionable. Mike |I used Quicken lawyer today. I opened Zonealarm, and set it to stop all |traffic. |When I got done using it (Quicken), Zonealarm came up, there it was, |calling |in to try to pass the info back to a site. Ha ! Ha !, I used Adware, |deleted the bad stuff out, then turned it back on. I looked at what it |was |going to send them. EVERYTHING I had put in a LIVING WILL I made out, |plus |the equipment I was running, and on and on. | It executes a program called dss/agent, and tells windows (in the |Register), to run it. It calls in using 24.131.1.9 and it’s called |Brodcast background agent (the o has a line through it) when it came up |in |Zonealarm. The address in the Register is |www.brodcast.net/per/DSS/querySS.cgi |Yes the letters are capital letters. | |The next time you use it, it re-writes this to the register again to |HKEY_LOCAL_Machinesoftwarebroderbund softwaredss |It executes dssagent.exe | |When you use it, it puts it inside Quicken, under a Folder called |Mattel, |which is site on the net that sells software. But I bought mine from |Parsons. | | |Does anyone know if there are similar "problems" with other Intuit |software? Thanks. | |Jim
Mike Block, Tax Fighting C.P.A. World’s #1 QuickBooks Top Tester FREE NetLedger consult refer #10260 FREE 462p QB book/error codes/ 80 QB add-ons http://blocktax.com/
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – what my disability insurance company is proposing? They want me to pick a career to be trained for, and they’ll pay for training, even if it means going back to college for a while. In exchange, they get to close this claim, and quit paying me the monthly stipend I’ve been getting. They hired a career counselor. She’s done some interest and skills testing with me. She meets with my therapist next week to get his input. It’s tempting, but I don’t know what I want to be. And what if the depression gets worse again and I can’t handle college? But how often does one get an opportunity like this? My therapist seems to think that I should go for it. Yikes. Life changing decision.
Hello Cindy Lou, I am going through the same things that you are right now here in Canada. I have gone through all the Gatb testing and interests and skills testing. I already had a plan on what I wanted to do before all the testing. I fear college as well due to my short term memory loss which is a side effect from my anti-depressant. I feel what is the worst case scenerio….what I might fail so what at least I tried. As far as you not knowing what to be or what to do..think about what you like to do. Ask yourself if there is anything that you are passionate about? My passion is computers so I have decided on a career in IT. Good luck Cindy. — Cheers Before you buy.
I’ve been out of work, on disability for depression. I’ve gotten a lot better. They think that I could possibly go back, but that I’m just scared shitless about having another breakdown. They thought that letting me start over in whatever I wanted to do, would help my self-confidence. Also, my job was high stress, which never bothered me before this breakdown, but ever since than, I seem to wilt under any little stress.
You’re talking about me, aren’t you? — The opinions given above may be mine. They might also just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?
2) Determine what I want to be, how to become that, and how long it will take. They’ll pay monthly benefit plus expense of retraining or college until the predetermined date when I should be done. Then it’s over, whether I succeed or fail. Claim closed.
That’s a rip. It’s a gamble, win/lose determined by whether I am going to be well enough to work soon, or disabled by depression for quite awhile longer.
Choose carefully then. They gave me an interest test, (well done, very professional) then two weeks ago they brought someone in to administrer some skills testing. It was really lame. Spelling, grammar, etc. I already have a degree in mathematics. She said I was the first person to ever score 100% on their logic test. It turns out that they do most of their skills testing on people who do manual labor and then get physically disabled. So they say I have the aptitude to do "anything." Haha.
Well, that just means no deficits anywhere. Now you have to figure out what is exciting. What is exciting? Anything?
Not that it isn’t a GREAT opportunity..that I, for one, would jump at…but it does completely anger me that companies think it is your job that causes your depression…like a new job will just fix everything? It might…in my case…make things much easier to bear…but it doesn’t fix it, you know? Does sound like a great chance for a new start though! Good luck, Tami
I’ve been out of work, on disability for depression for over two years. I’ve gotten a lot better. They think that I could possibly go back, but that I’m just scared shitless about having another breakdown. They thought that letting me start over in whatever I wanted to do, would help my self-confidence. Also, my job was high stress, which never bothered me before this breakdown, but ever since than, I seem to wilt under any little stress. They are looking for ways for me to use my skills in a less stressful environment. At least that’s what they’re telling me, and it sounds like it makes sense. Cindy Lou, ever-trusting
But I find that there is more to jobs than knowledge and skills. I have sleeping problems and don’t handle stress very well when I’m tired. I also have problems dealing with people all day. What usually happens is I do great at first, but then gradually go down hill. For example I finally figured out that I do great in collage as long as I keep my course load down to two or three classes, and avoid all classes before noon.
In addition to the skills testing, there was also "interest" testing and "values" testing. Where all of these areas intersect is supposed to be where I would be happiest. It seems to me they are trying to force you into making a commitment way too soon. By doing that they put ALL of the risk on you. I would think that there is some way you may be able to get them to take on more of the risk. For example: Goto college but they can’t close the case until after you have been working for 6 months. That way you don’t risk your coverage. I don’t know how much you can bargain with them.
God idea, I hadn’t thought about that. You might want to consult someone on this. (a lawyer?, or maybe Social Security?) I don’t know who you would talk to, but it would be best to get a second opinions on this before you sign anything.
Good idea too. I don’t know, I would be extremely uncomfortable with the deal they offered you. I’m not trying to discourage you. It’s a nice offer but it has some holes in it. Ron
Thanks.
Not that it isn’t a GREAT opportunity..that I, for one, would jump at…but it does completely anger me that companies think it is your job that causes your depression…like a new job will just fix everything? It might…in my case…make things much easier to bear…but it doesn’t fix it, you know? Does sound like a great chance for a new start though! Good luck, Tami
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – what my disability insurance company is proposing? They want me to pick a career to be trained for, and they’ll pay for training, even if it means going back to college for a while. In exchange, they get to close this claim, and quit paying me the monthly stipend I’ve been getting. They hired a career counselor. She’s done some interest and skills testing with me. She meets with my therapist next week to get his input. It’s tempting, but I don’t know what I want to be. And what if the depression gets worse again and I can’t handle college? But how often does one get an opportunity like this? My therapist seems to think that I should go for it. Yikes. Life changing decision.
I had to make a decision like this 18 months ago. It was the best thing I evr did and it helped with the depresion. I understand your anxieties though I had the same fears and doubts. good luck Linda – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –
It’s maybe good for you… It’s maybe only good for the company. It’s not easy decision. What feeling do you have? Aline – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – what my disability insurance company is proposing? They want me to pick a career to be trained for, and they’ll pay for training, even if it means going back to college for a while. In exchange, they get to close this claim, and quit paying me the monthly stipend I’ve been getting. They hired a career counselor. She’s done some interest and skills testing with me. She meets with my therapist next week to get his input. It’s tempting, but I don’t know what I want to be. And what if the depression gets worse again and I can’t handle college? But how often does one get an opportunity like this? My therapist seems to think that I should go for it. Yikes. Life changing decision.
Maggie !!!!!! You’re back!!!! I’ve been wondering where you’ve been. You didn’t answer the MIA I posted last week.
Sorry, I didn’t see the MIA. I just got back from vacation. Funny that a person (me) who does nothing goes on vacation, huh? It was a wonderful time though and I am not very happy about returning to my real life. <snipped My therapist meets with them next Friday. He wanted a general idea of what I think I want to do. Making decisions isn’t one of my strong points. I didn’t know. He said to try to get back to him by Thursday with a few ideas. I don’t know when I have to actually make a decision and sign the papers. Cindy Lou
Yikes! This is happening too fast. Can you say that you are not up to being retrained at this time, but would like this option in the near future? I wouldn’t be able to decide something that big easily. Decision making is incredibly difficult for me. I can’t even decide what to order in a restaurant, never mind what I want to do with the rest of my life. I would need much more time to consider everything. Maggie
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Oh man, I don’t envy you this decision one little bit! A few years ago when I had a terrible crash and didn’t work for like a year and a half DSHS offered to send me to a program at community college. Several to chose from. I got my highschool transcripts together and made it as far as the college… went inside, tried to find the room I was supposed to go to and totally fell apart. There were just too many people going way too fast and it was all so confusing and noisy that I couldn’t take it. Now I think I could handle it since I’m so much better than I was then, but, of course, now I’m working and no one’s offering to pay for any classes for me. I have always regretted that I never went to college. — Molly "I’m losing my favorite game, You’re losing your mind again.." The Cardigans
It’s exciting and intimidating at the same time.
Cindy Lou, I don’t mean to burst your bubble… The same thing happened to my brother – CA – I hope they told you that you get X amount of money and that is supposed to pay for school and your other living expenses – you don’t get your regular disability check.
I’ll get the details in writing before I sign anything. my brother went to school, completed and of course they promise to help you find a job, but when he was done, all the jobs required at least 1 year experience. he eventually did find a job and is is very happy.
good. but scary in the mean time, right? I hope it works for you JT
Thank-you.
Maggie !!!!!! You’re back!!!! I’ve been wondering where you’ve been. You didn’t answer the MIA I posted last week.
Cindy I agree with clavija. My big fear would be my ability to complete the schooling. I tried to do some training after a year of not working and it was horrible. I was unable to learn anything that I didn’t already have a solid background in. I was forced to drop out. If you are seriously thinking of retraining, try taking one course on your own (in any subject that you find interesting) and see how that goes before accepting the insurance companies offer. How long do you have before you must make the decision? Maggie
My therapist meets with them next Friday. He wanted a general idea of what I think I want to do. Making decisions isn’t one of my strong points. I didn’t know. He said to try to get back to him by Thursday with a few ideas. I don’t know when I have to actually make a decision and sign the papers. Cindy Lou
It’s tempting, but I don’t know what I want to be. And what if the depression gets worse again and I can’t handle college? Then you’re still on the insurance.
That’s the catch. This claim would be closed. My choices are: 1) get regular monthly check until I have recovered enough to return to former occupation. That could be next month, or it could go on until age 65. (I’m 40.) or 2) Determine what I want to be, how to become that, and how long it will take. They’ll pay monthly benefit plus expense of retraining or college until the predetermined date when I should be done. Then it’s over, whether I succeed or fail. Claim closed. A new claim would require that I pay $800 annual premium, and recover enough to work at least six months. Then get disabled again, wait out the six month waiting period, and finally start receiving benefits again. That’s all very unlikely to happen if I’m depressed enough to fail at whatever program I’m in. It’s a gamble, win/lose determined by whether I am going to be well enough to work soon, or disabled by depression for quite awhile longer. Maybe you could get them to pay for a GATB and a COII first. A GATB is a General Aptitude Test Battery and a COII is a Combined Ordination of Interest and Intelligence. There are similar tests with similar names too. What they do is determine what you are good at, what you’re interested in and what you will easily learn. Tests like those can give you a clear idea of what to do.
They gave me an interest test, (well done, very professional) then two weeks ago they brought someone in to administrer some skills testing. It was really lame. Spelling, grammar, etc. I already have a degree in mathematics. She said I was the first person to ever score 100% on their logic test. It turns out that they do most of their skills testing on people who do manual labor and then get physically disabled. So they say I have the aptitude to do "anything." Haha.
Cindy I agree with clavija. My big fear would be my ability to complete the schooling. I tried to do some training after a year of not working and it was horrible. I was unable to learn anything that I didn’t already have a solid background in. I was forced to drop out. If you are seriously thinking of retraining, try taking one course on your own (in any subject that you find interesting) and see how that goes before accepting the insurance companies offer. How long do you have before you must make the decision? Maggie
Cindy Lou, I don’t mean to burst your bubble… The same thing happened to my brother – CA – I hope they told you that you get X amount of money and that is supposed to pay for school and your other living expenses – you don’t get your regular disability check. my brother went to school, completed and of course they promise to help you find a job, but when he was done, all the jobs required at least 1 year experience. he eventually did find a job and is is very happy. I hope it works for you JT – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – what my disability insurance company is proposing? They want me to pick a career to be trained for, and they’ll pay for training, even if it means going back to college for a while. In exchange, they get to close this claim, and quit paying me the monthly stipend I’ve been getting. They hired a career counselor. She’s done some interest and skills testing with me. She meets with my therapist next week to get his input. It’s tempting, but I don’t know what I want to be. And what if the depression gets worse again and I can’t handle college? But how often does one get an opportunity like this? My therapist seems to think that I should go for it. Yikes. Life changing decision.
what my disability insurance company is proposing? They want me to pick a career to be trained for, and they’ll pay for training, even if it means going back to college for a while.
That is great! In exchange, they get to close this claim, and quit paying me the monthly stipend I’ve been getting.
Yeah, that looks bad that way but the opportunity for training programs were fought for by disabled people. The insurance companies, with all their accountants and economists, didn’t think it would be cheaper for them. They used to just kind of warehouse and welfare disabled people. They hired a career counselor. She’s done some interest and skills testing with me. She meets with my therapist next week to get his input.
Tell her you want to be a career counselor. haha It’s tempting, but I don’t know what I want to be. And what if the depression gets worse again and I can’t handle college?
Then you’re still on the insurance. But how often does one get an opportunity like this? My therapist seems to think that I should go for it.
Yeah, go for it. Maybe you could get them to pay for a GATB and a COII first. A GATB is a General Aptitude Test Battery and a COII is a Combined Ordination of Interest and Intelligence. There are similar tests with similar names too. What they do is determine what you are good at, what you’re interested in and what you will easily learn. Tests like those can give you a clear idea of what to do.
what my disability insurance company is proposing? They want me to pick a career to be trained for, and they’ll pay for training, even if it means going back to college for a while. In exchange, they get to close this claim, and quit paying me the monthly stipend I’ve been getting. They hired a career counselor. She’s done some interest and skills testing with me. She meets with my therapist next week to get his input. It’s tempting, but I don’t know what I want to be. And what if the depression gets worse again and I can’t handle college? But how often does one get an opportunity like this? My therapist seems to think that I should go for it. Yikes. Life changing decision.
And I still don’t know if I should incorporate to save on taxes.
Probably not. The savings are not large, there is some hassle, and distributions in lieu of wages are definitely not "IRS approved". — Jim Hudspeth, CPA – http://home.att.net/~jdhcpa/mainpage.html – Washington, USA Associate Member, Association of Certified Fraud Examiners
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – And I still don’t know if I should incorporate to save on taxes. Probably not. The savings are not large, there is some hassle, and distributions in lieu of wages are definitely not "IRS approved". — Jim Hudspeth, CPA – http://home.att.net/~jdhcpa/mainpage.html – Washington, USA Associate Member, Association of Certified Fraud Examiners
In addition you have the additional cost of maintaining the corporation and filing annual tax returns etc. You can do the return yourself but is isn’t easy and if you pay someone to prepare the return, the 1120S will cost a good bit more than a schedule C. Also in Texas if don’t take the profit out as wages, the profit left in the corporation is subject to the 4.5% (of income) franchise tax. Also some states have a high minimum franchise tax/annual registration fee for corporations. I don’t recommend incorporation in the situation described above. Also the basic purpose of incorporation is not to save taxes. Primary reasons are obtaining capital from more than one investor, liability limitations and continuity of life.
As provided for by the TX legislature last year, if a corp’s combined equity and gross receipts are less than $150,000 (beginning for cal. yr. 2000), there is no franchise (read income tax) due. I don’t know whether it’s been mentioned here or in the tax group, but the audit rate for a corp is considerably less than for a sole prop. This is a major consideration with my clients in their decision making process on whether to incorporate or stay solo. George – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – And I still don’t know if I should incorporate to save on taxes. Probably not. The savings are not large, there is some hassle, and distributions in lieu of wages are definitely not "IRS approved". — Jim Hudspeth, CPA – http://home.att.net/~jdhcpa/mainpage.html – Washington, USA Associate Member, Association of Certified Fraud Examiners In addition you have the additional cost of maintaining the corporation and filing annual tax returns etc. You can do the return yourself but is isn’t easy and if you pay someone to prepare the return, the 1120S will cost a good bit more than a schedule C. Also in Texas if don’t take the profit out as wages, the profit left in the corporation is subject to the 4.5% (of income) franchise tax. Also some states have a high minimum franchise tax/annual registration fee for corporations. I don’t recommend incorporation in the situation described above. Also the basic purpose of incorporation is not to save taxes. Primary reasons are obtaining capital from more than one investor, liability limitations and continuity of life.
snip I don’t know whether it’s been mentioned here or in the tax group, but the audit rate for a corp is considerably less than for a sole prop. This is a major consideration with my clients in their decision making process on whether to incorporate or stay solo.
No, it has’t been mentioned, and it is a good point. On the other hand, the audit rate on individuals is now so low that the difference may no longer be significant. — Jim Hudspeth, CPA – http://home.att.net/~jdhcpa/mainpage.html – Washington, USA Associate Member, Association of Certified Fraud Examiners
I don’t know whether it’s been mentioned here or in the tax group, but the audit rate for a corp is considerably less than for a sole prop. This is a major consideration with my clients in their decision making process on whether to incorporate or stay solo. George
There is a systematically lower frequency of audit for complex entities or transaction bases, compared to simple ones having all of the other factors equal. There is a systematically higher cost in terms of time and resources and anyways IRS’ technical depth is not unlimited. There is a rational process of resource allocation that takes place in revenue collection (i.e. maximizing revenue over time, for a given compliance resource expenditure) This does not in any way imply that having a complex structure for a transaction will ‘evade tax’. It just states the fact that if there is a large population (which the US taxpaying public certainly is), and that population has two reservoirs of businesses has the same frequency and magnitude of audit adjustments, viewed historically, but one takes 5 times more resource to audit, then, the complex guys are just not going to get audited as often. * Todd F. Boyle CPA http://www.GLDialtone.com/ * 9745-128th Av NE, Kirkland WA 98033 (425) 827-3107 * XML accounting, WebLedgers, ASPs, GL dialtone, whatever it takes
Jim I agree with your method. I would however modify it a bit and ask them how much they would expect to receive if they were to work for someone else Would your approach be the same for an S-Corp with only one employee, and all income generated was from personal services performed by the single employee shareholder, and little or no capital contributions into the Corp? Allan Martin
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – David I can’t see how you can justify a 50:50 split between distributions and salary. Using an arbitrary allocation makes no sense. Each situation should be looked at on a case by case basis. How one defines a reasonable salary I must admit can be quite difficult if not impossible. I would argue that if 100 different accountants had to come up with an amount there would be 100 different answers. I ask my clients, "What would you pay someone else to do your job", and press them to put enough time and energy into the answer to where we feel comfortable that THEY could sit across a table from an IRS agent and defend their number. Usually that means going to some outside source – employment agency – trade association – etc. for comparative numbers. So far I haven’t had a problem with this approach, and I know the IRS has looked at it, though never with any real enthusiasm. From first hand observation I am shocked at how many sole-proprietors incorporate and take the S-Corporation election under the misguided belief that doing so exempts them from paying Social Security Taxes. In many cases these same taxpayers add insult to injury by not reporting the distributions on their personal state tax returns. I practice in Washington, which does not have an income tax. Most of the state reports (other states) I have had experience with require that S-Corporation profits be reported in the same manner as on the federal return, and do not ask for a reporting of the distributions. — Jim Hudspeth, CPA – http://home.att.net/~jdhcpa/mainpage.html – Washington, USA Associate Member, Association of Certified Fraud Examiners
I can’t see how you can justify a 50:50 split between distributions and salary.
I think he’s arguing that, as a practical matter, if there is virtually any salary the IRS doesn’t tend to raise the issue or carry the case. Obviously, there would be some cases where it might be clear that the 50/50 split would not be seen as reasonable (the only source of income was the owner’s services and the entity has absolutely no assets of any other sort), but even then the likelihood of challenge drops. As a practical matter, the reason why the IRS will not be as likely to challenge in that case comes more from concern about getting whipsawed in an unrelated C corporation case–if the IRS wins a case that says all earnings of corporation X represented compensation by definition (and that a smaller amount wasn’t reasonable), it could be used in a C corporation case of a similar entity when the IRS was arguing there was unreasonably *HIGH* compensation.
Jim
snip Would your approach be the same for an S-Corp with only one employee, and all income generated was from personal services performed by the single employee shareholder, and little or no capital contributions into the Corp?
Sort of. I would still want the discussion. Assuming you have one owner, one employee (same person) and no capital requirement (not exactly the same thing as no capital contribution), the reality is that all income is earned income and therefore should be salary. As Ed points out in a prior post, however, the IRS would probably not press the issue to it’s logical extreme out of concern that their argument could be used against them in a C-Corp excessive salary case. I look at this type of situation as some combination of crap shoot / horse trade. The objective is to end up with a livable / defendable position that is financially profitable. I love these situations (when my client has the sense, cents and stomach and for it). — Jim Hudspeth, CPA – http://home.att.net/~jdhcpa/mainpage.html – Washington, USA Associate Member, Association of Certified Fraud Examiners
Once again a case for accounting being an art and not a science.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Jim snip Would your approach be the same for an S-Corp with only one employee, and all income generated was from personal services performed by the single employee shareholder, and little or no capital contributions into the Corp? Sort of. I would still want the discussion.
I have to believe the discussion would have a slightly different outcome if the client were a C-Corp. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Assuming you have one owner, one employee (same person) and no capital requirement (not exactly the same thing as no capital contribution), the reality is that all income is earned income and therefore should be salary. As Ed points out in a prior post, however, the IRS would probably not press the issue to it’s logical extreme out of concern that their argument could be used against them in a C-Corp excessive salary case. I look at this type of situation as some combination of crap shoot / horse trade. The objective is to end up with a livable / defendable position that is financially profitable. I love these situations (when my client has the sense, cents and stomach and for it). — Jim Hudspeth, CPA – http://home.att.net/~jdhcpa/mainpage.html – Washington, USA Associate Member, Association of Certified Fraud Examiners
So it doesn’t make any sense in terms of taxes to incorporate if your income is less than $76,200? Jerry
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Your FICA/SE tax savings in this specific example for 2000 would be: $26,200 x 12.4% + $50,000 x 2.9% = $4,698.80 You only pay OASDI on the first $76,200 of earnings. Dick K. If your profits are 100k, take 50k salary & 50k distributions. See what that does to your taxes. So what are my saving going to be like this? Jerry
Would your approach be the same for an S-Corp with only one employee, and all income generated was from personal services performed by the single employee shareholder, and little or no capital contributions into the
Corp? That is exactly my situation–one employee. And I still don’t know if I should incorporate to save on taxes. Jerry
I would agree that the cases that I’ve seen the IRS be successful in have involved taking zero salary. While it doesn’t follow that $1.00 in salary would have changed Spicer Accounting or Radtke’s results, it is possible the courts wouldn’t have been as harsh had some arguably reasonable amount been paid. Additionally, it also works a lot better the less that is taken out as distributions during the year–that is, if the funds are left in the business, the IRS has a tough time arguing that they were "disguised" salary. Of course, the problem is that most clients don’t want to do that…
The main thing is the issue would probably never have appeared in the first place in the losing cases had the taxpayers been reasonable. But they went for broke, and wound up broke!
Your FICA/SE tax savings in this specific example for 2000 would be: $26,200 x 12.4% + $50,000 x 2.9% = $4,698.80 You only pay OASDI on the first $76,200 of earnings. Dick K.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If your profits are 100k, take 50k salary & 50k distributions. See what that does to your taxes. So what are my saving going to be like this? Jerry
David I can’t see how you can justify a 50:50 split between distributions and salary. Using an arbitrary allocation makes no sense. Each situation should be looked at on a case by case basis. How one defines a reasonable salary I must admit can be quite difficult if not impossible. I would argue that if 100 different accountants had to come up with an amount there would be 100 different answers. From first hand observation I am shocked at how many sole-proprietors incorporate and take the S-Corporation election under the misguided belief that doing so exempts them from paying Social Security Taxes. In many cases these same taxpayers add insult to injury by not reporting the distributions on their personal state tax returns. Allan Martin, CPA
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – It can be an appropriate tax saving measure to use the S Corporation as you describe. Many CPAs and attorneys will disagree, but this is a tactic I have used with many, many corporations over the years and NEVER have I had a problem with it. What I do, though, is to be absolutely certain that the shareholder takes some salary. As a guideline, I recommend half the earnings be distributed as salary and half as distributions. It would be VERY DIFFICULT for IRS to defeat this treatment. OTOH, if you pay NO salary, you’re an easy mark; also, since the 1120S discloses that no salaries were paid but distributions were, you may well be "asking for it". For the most part, I believe cases that have been litigated on this matter have involved shareholders who took NO salary. The other side of the coin is that, by taking a small salary, you will be filing the necessary P/R tax reports, etc. Thus, if you later lose your argument, you will not be subject to the nasty nonfiling penalties. If your profits are 100k, take 50k salary & 50k distributions. See what that does to your taxes. If you can justify a 40k salary as "reasonable", all the better. I would think that, if capital is a material income-producing factor, you would be in an even stronger position. While I’m not aware of anyone using this argument before the Courts, I suspect it would be a good one. David
David I can’t see how you can justify a 50:50 split between distributions and salary. Using an arbitrary allocation makes no sense. Each situation should be looked at on a case by case basis. How one defines a reasonable salary I must admit can be quite difficult if not impossible. I would argue that if 100 different accountants had to come up with an amount there would be 100 different answers.
I ask my clients, "What would you pay someone else to do your job", and press them to put enough time and energy into the answer to where we feel comfortable that THEY could sit across a table from an IRS agent and defend their number. Usually that means going to some outside source – employment agency – trade association – etc. for comparative numbers. So far I haven’t had a problem with this approach, and I know the IRS has looked at it, though never with any real enthusiasm. From first hand observation I am shocked at how many sole-proprietors incorporate and take the S-Corporation election under the misguided belief that doing so exempts them from paying Social Security Taxes. In many cases these same taxpayers add insult to injury by not reporting the distributions on their personal state tax returns.
I practice in Washington, which does not have an income tax. Most of the state reports (other states) I have had experience with require that S-Corporation profits be reported in the same manner as on the federal return, and do not ask for a reporting of the distributions. — Jim Hudspeth, CPA – http://home.att.net/~jdhcpa/mainpage.html – Washington, USA Associate Member, Association of Certified Fraud Examiners
It can be an appropriate tax saving measure to use the S Corporation as you describe. Many CPAs and attorneys will disagree, but this is a tactic I have used with many, many corporations over the years and NEVER have I had a problem with it. What I do, though, is to be absolutely certain that the shareholder takes some salary. As a guideline, I recommend half the earnings be distributed as salary and half as distributions. It would be VERY DIFFICULT for IRS to defeat this treatment. OTOH, if you pay NO salary, you’re an easy mark; also, since the 1120S discloses that no salaries were paid but distributions were, you may well be "asking for it". For the most part, I believe cases that have been litigated on this matter have involved shareholders who took NO salary. The other side of the coin is that, by taking a small salary, you will be filing the necessary P/R tax reports, etc. Thus, if you later lose your argument, you will not be subject to the nasty nonfiling penalties. If your profits are 100k, take 50k salary & 50k distributions. See what that does to your taxes. If you can justify a 40k salary as "reasonable", all the better. I would think that, if capital is a material income-producing factor, you would be in an even stronger position. While I’m not aware of anyone using this argument before the Courts, I suspect it would be a good one. David
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hello, Is it true that it doesn’t make much sense to incorporate if you are just trying to save to taxes? Right now I am doing business as a self-propriator, and my profits are around $100,000 a year. As I understand, in addition to the income tax I have to pay the self-employment tax which I can avoid if I become an S corporation. So my question if the saings really are 15%, why not incorporate just to save on taxes? Or am I wrong? Also, does it make any sense in terms of taxes to incorporate in places like Nevada if I am a California resident. I assume I would have to pay taxes as a CA resident anyway, but I just want to make sure. I woud really appreciate any advise. Thanks, Jerry P.S. I am in the Bay Area, and I was wondering if somebody can recommend an accountant who would be familiar with this situation.
Incorporating in a state other than CA doesn’t make sense; in any event you still would need to pay the CA franchise tax (minimum $800 per year) plus the hassles of filing a second tax return and dealing with a corporate entity.
But what if I do my business traveling all the time, and selling "soft" products over the Internet. Although I am a CA resident, I don’t actually spend too much in California. Actually most of the time I am overseas or in some other state. Does it make any difference? Jerry
If your profits are 100k, take 50k salary & 50k distributions. See what that does to your taxes.
So what are my saving going to be like this? Jerry
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Is it true that it doesn’t make much sense to incorporate if you are just trying to save to taxes? Right now I am doing business as a self-propriator, and my profits are around $100,000 a year. As I understand, in addition to the income tax I have to pay the self-employment tax which I can avoid if I become an S corporation. So my question if the saings really are 15%, why not incorporate just to save on taxes? Or am I wrong? Also, does it make any sense in terms of taxes to incorporate in places like Nevada if I am a California resident. I assume I would have to pay taxes as a CA resident anyway, but I just want to make sure. I woud really appreciate any advise. Thanks, Jerry P.S. I am in the Bay Area, and I was wondering if somebody can recommend an accountant who would be familiar with this situation.
Incorporating in a state other than CA doesn’t make sense; in any event you still would need to pay the CA franchise tax (minimum $800 per year) plus the hassles of filing a second tax return and dealing with a corporate entity. Remember that above $75,000 (give or take; it changes every year), the SE tax rate is only 2.9%. You also have SDI to worry about as well as federal and state unemployment taxes which you don’t pay as a sole proprietor. While incorporation MIGHT save you a liability headache, remember that it won’t really protect you from your own actions, if the other side has a smart attorney. You can probably better cover your liability through insurance. So my advice is: consult a local tax pro to be sure of the right choice for YOUR business. My guess is that a corporation would not be optimal in CA. Tom –Solving your tax and business problems with Professional Service…Personal Attention Web: http://members.aol.com/thealycpa/Tom_Healy_CPA.html
If your profits are 100k, take 50k salary & 50k distributions. See what that does to your taxes.
One hitch, though, is that the nastiest part of the SE tax applies to the lower half of the distributions–that is, by taking $50K in salary and $50K in distributions, you do *NOT* reduce your SE tax by 50%. That’s because the FICA portion of the SE tax is capped–so the tax is regressive in nature (opposite of the income tax) and the first dollars earned are the most expensive ones from a tax standpoint. I would agree that the cases that I’ve seen the IRS be successful in have involved taking zero salary. While it doesn’t follow that $1.00 in salary would have changed Spicer Accounting or Radtke’s results, it is possible the courts wouldn’t have been as harsh had some arguably reasonable amount been paid. Additionally, it also works a lot better the less that is taken out as distributions during the year–that is, if the funds are left in the business, the IRS has a tough time arguing that they were "disguised" salary. Of course, the problem is that most clients don’t want to do that…
But what if I do my business traveling all the time, and selling "soft" products over the Internet. Although I am a CA resident, I don’t actually spend too much in California. Actually most of the time I am overseas or in some other state. Does it make any difference?
How many states do you want to file in? Because your argument is based on the theory that you shouldn’t be charged with having California sales if you aren’t in California. OK, fine–but then you are arguing you earned the income in Kansas, Ohio, Arizona, Oregon, etc. and those states would like to hear from you now. And since you’ve never likely filed with those states, they’d like back income tax returns for every year since you first started (no returns filed means no statute of limitations in most states). And, oh yeah, you likely need to qualify the corporation in each of those states in order to do business there–which means filing with each state, paying fees, etc. In essence, I think you just opened Pandora’s box… Back to reality–you are likely going to want to argue you are really only a California corporation and you don’t have sufficient nexus to trigger filing in all those other states. But that argument is going to throw the income back into California.
As I understand, in addition to the income tax I have to pay the self-employment tax which I can avoid if I become an S corporation. So my question if the saings really are 15%, why not incorporate just to save on taxes? Or am I wrong?
Let’s be careful here. While S corporation income is not subject to the self-employment tax, you would have to take a reasonable salary to compensate you for your services if you are taking distributions from the S corporation. And, on that reasonable salary you’d have to withhold FICA and Medicare taxes from the payment *AND* pay the employer portion of said taxes. Which works out to, effectively, the same rate as the self-employment tax (amazing how that works, huh?). If you don’t pay it…well, let me introduce you to the Spicer Accounting case and Mr. Spicer: —begin quoted text Spicer Accounting, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant v. United States of America, Defendant-Appellee (CA-9), U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, 89-35071, 11/1/90, 918 F2d 90, Affirming an unreported District Court decision Robert E. Kovacevich, 818 Riverside Ave., Spokane, Wash., for plaintiff-appellant. Shirley D. Peterson, Assistant Attorney General, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. 20350, for defendant-appellee. Before HUG, JR., NELSON and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges. OPINION NELSON, Circuit Judge: Taxpayer accounting corporation seeks a refund for FICA and FUTA taxes paid to the IRS on behalf of Mr. Spicer. Taxpayer contends that payments paid to Mr. Spicer were dividends, since payments made to stockholders in a subchapter S corporation are not wages. We find that because payments received by Mr. Spicer were for substantial services rendered, these payments are "wages" subject to FICA and FUTA. Taxpayer asserts, in the alternative, that it was not liable for FICA and FUTA because Mr. Spicer was an independent contractor, not an employee. We deny Taxpayer’s claim finding that there is no evidence that Mr. Spicer was an independent contractor. Finally, we hold that section 530 of the Revenue Act of 1978 does not relieve Taxpayer from FlCA and FUTA liability for the years 1981 and 1982, because Taxpayer’s treatment of Mr. Spicer as a stockholder, not as an employee, was unreasonable. We, therefore, affirm the district court’s decision. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Mr. Spicer is the president, treasurer, and director of taxpayer corporation, Spicer Accounting, Inc. (Taxpayer). In 1985, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) made assessments against Taxpayer for Federal Insurance Contribution Tax (FICA) and Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA). The assessments were made for the years 1981 and 1982 in light of allegations by the IRS that Mr. Spicer was an employee of Taxpayer. The assessed amounts, including interest and penalties, were paid to the IRS. Taxpayer now seeks a refund of the amounts paid. Mr. Spicer has been a licensed public accountant since 1957 and the president of Taxpayer since 1973. He and his wife are the only stockholders in Taxpayer, each owning fifty percent of the corporation. Mr. Spicer has never entered into an employment agreement with Taxpayer. At no time during his relationship with Taxpayer has he been paid wages or salary denominated as such. The arrangement throughout the relationship has been that Mr. Spicer would donate his services to the corporation, and that as a stockholder, he would withdraw earnings in the form of dividends. Mr. Spicer has consistently reported his income as dividend income. Mr. Spicer performs substantial services for Taxpayer. During the period in question, Mr. Spicer worked for Taxpayer approximately thirty-six hours per week. During tax season, he would typically work six-day weeks. Mr. Spicer would not, however, go into the office when demand for accounting services was lower. Also, during the period in question, Mr. Spicer owned certain rental property, and he would often perform work relating to that property during business hours. Mr. Spicer testified at trial that work on the rental property occupied approximately ten to fifteen percent of his time during the period in question. Mr. Spicer also testified that his accounting work for Taxpayer was crucial to the corporation’s business, and that Taxpayer could not function without him. He further testified that to hire a replacement for him would cost Taxpayer $16,000 to $17,000 per year. Spicer was the only accountant working for the firm, although Spicer’s wife and one other employee prepared tax returns and performed monthly bookkeeping for clients of Taxpayer. However, all tax forms prepared by the firm had to be signed by Mr. Spicer, and he was the only person during the period in question who could perform financial planning and audits, sign opinion letters, and represent clients before the IRS. Finally, Mr. Spicer testified that he believed that Taxpayer’s practice of reporting his income as dividends was proper, and that he also believed that such an arrangement would allow Taxpayer to avoid paying FICA and FUTA. He also testified that by denominating all of his income from Taxpayer as dividends, he would forego Social Security and other benefits. The district court held that Mr. Spicer was an employee and that the payments were "wages" subject to FICA and FUTA. Taxpayer timely appealed to this court. STANDARD OF REVIEW The determination of whether an employer-employee relationship exists involves a mixed question of law and fact. Professional & Executive Leasing, Inc. v. C.I.R. [88-2 USTC
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hello, I’m working on a business plan for my entrepreneurship course. I’m an MBA student concentrating in Marketing…. I was able to whip up a great marketing plan, but it’s been a while since I had accounting, and when I try to look at the text and some sample plans I have, my head starts spinning! I need help! Here are my basic questions: Which statements do I have to have in my plan? What order should they be in? How long in the future should I make my cash flow statements? The business I’m doing the plan for is an antique shop that doesn’t exist. I don’ think I’ll have any problems with the calculations (I have some Excel and QuatroPro templates to work from)…. I just need to know where to start and how to organize it! Any help is greatly appreciated.
—Five years out , quarterly statements, should suffice. Keep in mind that all projections are sales driven. So in an antique shop the variable costs (cost of goods sold) are tied to sales. I would use a gross margin of 45% and turn the inventory six times a year. This means for sales to increase the inventory must increase. We must retain earnings for more inventory. Don’t forget to show startup costs if this is to be a new business and don’t grow the inventory past the capacity of the square footage of the store. —StanB – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Thank you, David Duganne
Five years of pro forma income statements, balance sheets and cash flow statements are the norm for a business plan. The first year calculations are normally done on a monthly basis. Year two and three are presented on a quarterly basis and years four and five on a yearly basis. Gross margin and inventory turnover rates may be difficult to determine as industry norms are not published. However, many business people are quite happy to help students. You might want to contact several local businesses of this type. Financial pro formas are usually presented in an Appendix, with a summary given in the text. The income statements are presented by grouping: Year one (monthly) income statement, balance sheet and statement of cash flows; then the quarterly, and finally the yearly in the same order. Statements of changes in financial position may also be presented, but are not required. Critical financial ratios should be calculated and presented at the foot of your pro forma tables. The basis used for the projections must be clearly stated in the text. Hence, if you use a 45% gross margin and with a inventory turn-over of six times per year, you need to have a solid justification for this assumption. Return on investment is the critical data when it comes to investor capital. When dealing with a bank loan, cash flows are the item of most interest. Hence, you must decide on which type of financing you will use in this case before you design your pro formas. You will also need to choose a legal form of business; i.e, proprietorship, partnership or corporation (shares of stock sold, etc.). Don’t forget interest on the start-up capital loan or dividends to the investors. Managerial Finance instructors (myself included) tend to look at the small details, as well as the overall picture presented. A calculation error is not nearly as bad for the grade as a student forgetting one of the important small details — the type of detail that would put a business under. You will need to take a close look at the external and legal environment factors before doing your calculations. Also make sure the pro formas match the conclusions stated in the section covering your market research data. Mary T, MBA – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hello, I’m working on a business plan for my entrepreneurship course. I’m an MBA student concentrating in Marketing…. I was able to whip up a great marketing plan, but it’s been a while since I had accounting, and when I try to look at the text and some sample plans I have, my head starts spinning! I need help! Here are my basic questions: Which statements do I have to have in my plan? What order should they be in? How long in the future should I make my cash flow statements? The business I’m doing the plan for is an antique shop that doesn’t exist. I don’ think I’ll have any problems with the calculations (I have some Excel and QuatroPro templates to work from)…. I just need to know where to start and how to organize it! Any help is greatly appreciated. —Five years out , quarterly statements, should suffice. Keep in mind that all projections are sales driven. So in an antique shop the variable costs (cost of goods sold) are tied to sales. I would use a gross margin of 45% and turn the inventory six times a year. This means for sales to increase the inventory must increase. We must retain earnings for more inventory. Don’t forget to show startup costs if this is to be a new business and don’t grow the inventory past the capacity of the square footage of the store. —StanB Thank you, David Duganne
Hello, I’m working on a business plan for my entrepreneurship course. I’m an MBA student concentrating in Marketing…. I was able to whip up a great marketing plan, but it’s been a while since I had accounting, and when I try to look at the text and some sample plans I have, my head starts spinning! I need help! Here are my basic questions: Which statements do I have to have in my plan? What order should they be in? How long in the future should I make my cash flow statements? The business I’m doing the plan for is an antique shop that doesn’t exist. I don’ think I’ll have any problems with the calculations (I have some Excel and QuatroPro templates to work from)…. I just need to know where to start and how to organize it! Any help is greatly appreciated. Thank you, David Duganne
Hello. I’m a graduate student in accounting. I’m writing a paper about the international tax systems and laws,especially the comparison among U.S. , England, German, and so on. I gathered some articles, but have not many. If there is anyone who had concerning about this theme, or know about it ,please give me a letter. Everything concerned about my theme is welcomed. Thank you for your reading.
writes: Hello. I’m a graduate student in accounting. I’m writing a paper about the international tax systems and laws,especially the comparison among U.S. , England, German, and so on. I gathered some articles, but have not many. If there is anyone who had concerning about this theme, or know about it ,please give me a letter. Everything concerned about my theme is welcomed.
This link is from Will Yancey’s Home Page: http://www.taxsites.com/international.html 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!=:)
Hello. I’m a graduate student in accounting. I’m writing a paper about the international tax systems and laws,especially the comparison among U.S. , England, German, and so on. I gathered some articles, but have not many. If there is anyone who had concerning about this theme, or know about it ,please give me a letter. Everything concerned about my theme is welcomed. Thank you for your reading.
The best general references, and by far the most readable and logically organized, are the country-by-country tax brochures by the big accounting firms. Why don’t you plan your research approach, and any checklists and questionnaires first. Then ask the large firms if you could be allowed into their library for a specific number of hours, to review the country tax summaries or brochures. If you can wade thru all that material and complete your report within your time budget, you’ll probably get hired by the firm. You might need to narrow it down to just a particular question such as progressivity, treatment of cap gains, etc. I’ve always thought it would be dynamite, if somebody would perform a big regression analysis on marginal rates vs. taxable revenue realized, across all countries to prove that corporations tend to pencil in their profits into the subsidiaries having the lowest tax burdens.
Many thanks Mr. Gambier. I needed to think out loud. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Thanks for being patient. No, not an overall loss on the entire contract, but nevertheless a loss in year three. $300 loss in year 3, but an overall profit of $1700 on the entire contract. This is so because in year 2, profit was overstated (i.e., overestimated). This is the case since estimated cost to completion was underestimated in year 2; therefore, causing the percentage of revenue recognized in year 2 to be higher that it should have been and year 3’s revenue to be lower that it should be. The entry I anticipate would be a credit to interim profits for $300 in year 3 rather than the typical debit in a profit situation. Please comment. Thanks I’m still not sure we’re communicating here. The situation I think you’re describing is one where (for simplicity’s sake) you think you’re going to make $3,000 profit in three years, with the work being evenly spread over each year. Therefore you think at day 0 that you’re going to recognise $1,000 a year. At the end of year 2 this is still what you believe (so you’ve credited the P&L by $2,000). However in year 3 it all goes horribly wrong and you finish the project with a net profit for the whole project of $1,700 (instead of $3,000). Well, in this case you’d have a net debit to the P&L of $300 in year 3. Simple as that. I think you did understand it right all along, but you have to be very careful when you talk about profits and losses in long term contracts. As I think you realise. Hope this helps. — "If you want to look at my feet, say so," said the young man. "But don’t be a God-damned sneak about it." (from "A Perfect Day for Bananafish")
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Thanks for being patient. No, not an overall loss on the entire contract, but nevertheless a loss in year three. $300 loss in year 3, but an overall profit of $1700 on the entire contract. This is so because in year 2, profit was overstated (i.e., overestimated). This is the case since estimated cost to completion was underestimated in year 2; therefore, causing the percentage of revenue recognized in year 2 to be higher that it should have been and year 3’s revenue to be lower that it should be. The entry I anticipate would be a credit to interim profits for $300 in year 3 rather than the typical debit in a profit situation. Please comment. Thanks
I’m still not sure we’re communicating here. The situation I think you’re describing is one where (for simplicity’s sake) you think you’re going to make $3,000 profit in three years, with the work being evenly spread over each year. Therefore you think at day 0 that you’re going to recognise $1,000 a year. At the end of year 2 this is still what you believe (so you’ve credited the P&L by $2,000). However in year 3 it all goes horribly wrong and you finish the project with a net profit for the whole project of $1,700 (instead of $3,000). Well, in this case you’d have a net debit to the P&L of $300 in year 3. Simple as that. I think you did understand it right all along, but you have to be very careful when you talk about profits and losses in long term contracts. As I think you realise. Hope this helps. — "If you want to look at my feet, say so," said the young man. "But don’t be a God-damned sneak about it." (from "A Perfect Day for Bananafish")
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Thanks for your input. This is the situation. Year % completion Estimated profit 1 40% $1,000 2 75% $1,000 3 100% ($ 300) Yr three loss Total for contract est profit $1,700 Thanks Hold up a second. The figures I was giving for "Estimated profit" were the estimated TOTAL profit for the whole contract. Obviously as time goes by you’ll revise your estimate for the total contract. If your estimate for the total project never wavers from $1,700 then you’ll just accrue profits based on % completion. Your $300 loss in year 3 just doesn’t make any sense. Are you saying that in year 3 you have to spend $300 finishing off the last 25% of the project but you have no further billings? That’s not really a loss then is it?
Thanks for being patient. No, not an overall loss on the entire contract, but nevertheless a loss in year three. $300 loss in year 3, but an overall profit of $1700 on the entire contract. This is so because in year 2, profit was overstated (i.e., overestimated). This is the case since estimated cost to completion was underestimated in year 2; therefore, causing the percentage of revenue recognized in year 2 to be higher that it should have been and year 3’s revenue to be lower that it should be. The entry I anticipate would be a credit to interim profits for $300 in year 3 rather than the typical debit in a profit situation. Please comment. Thanks
Thanks for your input. This is the situation. Year % completion Estimated profit 1 40% $1,000 2 75% $1,000 3 100% ($ 300) Yr three loss Total for contract est profit $1,700 Thanks
Hold up a second. The figures I was giving for "Estimated profit" were the estimated TOTAL profit for the whole contract. Obviously as time goes by you’ll revise your estimate for the total contract. If your estimate for the total project never wavers from $1,700 then you’ll just accrue profits based on % completion. Your $300 loss in year 3 just doesn’t make any sense. Are you saying that in year 3 you have to spend $300 finishing off the last 25% of the project but you have no further billings? That’s not really a loss then is it? — "If you want to look at my feet, say so," said the young man. "But don’t be a God-damned sneak about it." (from "A Perfect Day for Bananafish")
Thanks for your input. This is the situation. Year % completion Estimated profit 1 40% $1,000 2 75% $1,000 3 100% ($ 300) Yr three loss Total for contract est profit $1,700 Thanks – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Under the percentage of completion method, when a loss is expected on the ENTIRE contract, the loss reported is the total expected loss on the ENTIRE contract plus all previous profit. Question: What happens when the ENTIRE contract results in a profit, but the LAST year ONLY results in a loss? Is the accounting in the loss year same as previous years? Put it in numbers. Year % completion Estimated profit 1 40% $1,000 2 75% $1,000 3 100% $ 300 Is this what you mean? This isn’t problematic – you accrue $400 profit in year 1, $350 profit in year 2 and charge $450 cost in year 3. Perhaps I don’t understand your question. But it’s the only way I can envisage a loss in the last year on an overall profitable contract. And you account for it exactly the same as you do profits. — "If you want to look at my feet, say so," said the young man. "But don’t be a God-damned sneak about it." (from "A Perfect Day for Bananafish")
Under the percentage of completion method, when a loss is expected on the ENTIRE contract, the loss reported is the total expected loss on the ENTIRE contract plus all previous profit. Question: What happens when the ENTIRE contract results in a profit, but the LAST year ONLY results in a loss? Is the accounting in the loss year same as previous years?
Put it in numbers. Year % completion Estimated profit 1 40% $1,000 2 75% $1,000 3 100% $ 300 Is this what you mean? This isn’t problematic – you accrue $400 profit in year 1, $350 profit in year 2 and charge $450 cost in year 3. Perhaps I don’t understand your question. But it’s the only way I can envisage a loss in the last year on an overall profitable contract. And you account for it exactly the same as you do profits. — "If you want to look at my feet, say so," said the young man. "But don’t be a God-damned sneak about it." (from "A Perfect Day for Bananafish")
Under the percentage of completion method, when a loss is expected on the ENTIRE contract, the loss reported is the total expected loss on the ENTIRE contract plus all previous profit. Question: What happens when the ENTIRE contract results in a profit, but the LAST year ONLY results in a loss? Is the accounting in the loss year same as previous years? Thanks
|Under the percentage of completion method, when a loss is |expected on the ENTIRE contract, the loss reported is the total |expected loss on the ENTIRE contract plus all previous profit. | |Question: What happens when the ENTIRE contract results in a |profit, but the LAST year ONLY results in a loss? Is the |accounting in the loss year same as previous years? | |Thanks | | Accounting a fiscal loss neccessitates data extraction and compilation to satisfy revenue policy and may even require journal adjustment. Accounting in the loss year follows local and regional guidelines. qs
Sorry, I should have mentioned US GAP. Any info appreciated Charlie
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -|Under the percentage of completion method, when a loss is |expected on the ENTIRE contract, the loss reported is the total |expected loss on the ENTIRE contract plus all previous profit. | |Question: What happens when the ENTIRE contract results in a |profit, but the LAST year ONLY results in a loss? Is the |accounting in the loss year same as previous years? | |Thanks | | Accounting a fiscal loss neccessitates data extraction and compilation to satisfy revenue policy and may even require journal adjustment. Accounting in the loss year follows local and regional guidelines. qs
Sorry, I’ll get it right! I meant US GAAP. Thanks
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Sorry, I should have mentioned US GAP. Any info appreciated Charlie |Under the percentage of completion method, when a loss is |expected on the ENTIRE contract, the loss reported is the total |expected loss on the ENTIRE contract plus all previous profit. | |Question: What happens when the ENTIRE contract results in a |profit, but the LAST year ONLY results in a loss? Is the |accounting in the loss year same as previous years? | |Thanks | | Accounting a fiscal loss neccessitates data extraction and compilation to satisfy revenue policy and may even require journal adjustment. Accounting in the loss year follows local and regional guidelines. qs
As I stated in my previous post, it’s not the lab techs, but those who administer the lab who need to answer to this. Sevenoaks is a government run forensics lab. As such, those who run the lab are government officials, not technicians. Market forces are becoming increasingly important in forensic science.[....]
I’m sure wiser words were never typed, but I didn’t write any of what you attributed to me above. jon.
As I stated in my previous post, it’s not the lab techs, but those who administer the lab who need to answer to this. Sevenoaks is a government run forensics lab. As such, those who run the lab are government officials, not technicians.
Market forces are becoming increasingly important in forensic science. The importation of american style drug-testing into the UK along with the National DNA database is all parts of a ‘hi-tech with bells and whistles’ campaign to make the government look good on fighting crime, and simultaneously make healthy profits for some drug pushers aka pharmaceutical companies. There is much more money in mass forensic science than in protecting a few innnocent individuals when bombs go off. We can be thankful for those police and security services who are able to disarm or anticipate bombs by the normal intelligence methods of paying informers, but there is a huge rivalry for getting budgets because of the workings of capitalism and the corporate elites who are the real rulers of our country. It is hardly surprising that government laboratories make mistakes. As ‘civil service’ it is pretty sure that all the workers are afraid of losing their jobs to privatisation. The only workers left will be accountants who go and pay the subcontractors who do the tests. The real cutting edge of forensic science is in drug testing for the military, and people in jail. That is where the big bucks are. It would be nice if the irish could be persuaded to follow the lead of the UK in this. It is much better if forensic science can also be applied where there is no crime at all in order to make it a profitable industry. In the case of explosives testing the bulk commodity is airline and other transportation security checks. After the Lockerbie bomb an enormous amount of money was spent on luggage screening. The airlines are powerful organisations in their own right, and have enough money and expertise to fight corporate interests, and demand a viable technology that works, at a reasonable price. They are also able to demand other methods, which maybe cheaper and just as effective: personal luggage reconciliation. The passenger takes their own baggage into the plane. When the level of violence gets too high, forensic science cannot contribute anything at all to the solution of the problem. Other methods need to be tried. tony goddard Tony Goddard (London & Belfast) http://www.webstrand.org/tony/tony.htm
As I stated in my previous post, it’s not the lab techs, but those who administer the lab who need to answer to this. Sevenoaks is a government run forensics lab. As such, those who run the lab are government officials, not technicians. I asked for evidence, and all I get is supposition. Your reasoning could apply equally to any such mishap.
After so many high profile ‘miscarrages of justice’ (read police frame ups) of Irish people in England it would be naive in the extreme to imagine that the ‘high ups’ in the British government either did not know about this latest scandel _or_ had given clear indications that they did not want to know. No dougbt though whatever inquiry occurs will scap-goat some technican for 25 years of British government policy and no dougbt many naive people in Britian will continue to belive in the ‘few rotton apples’ theory. Lets not forget its not just the Irish the British state has been framing but just about anyone in Britain who dares to fight back also. Andrew Andrew For a pretty complete introduction to anarchism check out <a href= "http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/2419" All about anarchism </a Articles on authoritarian socialism and the <A href= "http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/2419/leftindx.html" Russian revolution </a 1921 – 1996 Remember revolutionary Kronstadt <A href= "http://www.cs.utah.edu/~galt/kronstadt.html" Kronstadt </a
;No, Jon. The problem does not lie with the lab technicians here. This ;fish is rotting from the head down and as much as the government would ;like to bury it, it won’t stop reeking to high heaven until they find out ;truth of the matter.
Congrats Lyn. Very well put. The problem is that they *will* bury it along with all the other blatant past examples of HMG misconduct in recent years. Who is to stop them, especially with someone like Jon fighting their corner? Take my advice, conform and live on your knees, it is much easier, especially on s.c.b. I see from a recent survey that 57% of "surfers" are aged 31 – 50, 59% earn more than 25k and 29% earn more than 40k (compared with 7% of the general population). 23% are professionals (against 10% of the population) and 10% are company directors (against 2%). So what can you expect? BTW the gender distribution is 69% male 31% female. We on s.c.b love the establishment and are among its most devoted acolytes. It is only the losers who protest and kick up a fuss because the underclasses can’t hack it in a real, competitive, capitalist, free market economy like your average "surfer". The Irish should knuckle down and get well paid jobs like the rest of us, or fuck of somewhere else and opine endlessly from a safe and cosy distance like Jon, instead of carping on all the time about injustice in the UK. Doug. — London, England, UK, EU.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – As I stated in my previous post, it’s not the lab techs, but those who administer the lab who need to answer to this. Sevenoaks is a government run forensics lab. As such, those who run the lab are government officials, not technicians. I asked for evidence, and all I get is supposition. Your reasoning could apply equally to any such mishap. After so many high profile ‘miscarrages of justice’ (read police frame ups) of Irish people in England it would be naive in the extreme to imagine that the ‘high ups’ in the British government either did not know about this latest scandel _or_ had given clear indications that they did not want to know. No dougbt though whatever inquiry occurs will scap-goat some technican for 25 years of British government policy and no dougbt many naive people in Britian will continue to belive in the ‘few rotton apples’ theory. Lets not forget its not just the Irish the British state has been framing but just about anyone in Britain who dares to fight back also.
So you also want to indulge in elaborate supposition instead of evidence. Let’s see where *your* reasoning leads. People have been framed in the US, and minorities have been persecuted. So we can confidently assume that every screw-up in a US lab involves an elaborate high-level cover up in the US Administration. Brilliant. jon.
: You are being very confused here, either deliberately or in error. Sorry, Jon. I’ll try to outline it so you can understand. As I stated in my previous post, it’s not the lab techs, but those who administer the lab who need to answer to this. Sevenoaks is a government run forensics lab. As such, those who run the lab are government officials, not technicians. Any forensics lab would have a QC program in which known standards and blanks should have been run on the contaminated centrifuge equipment, but it doesn’t stop there. The lab would also have a quality assurance (QA) program in place as well- particularly since the lawyers of those convicted have been rebuked by the courts for the mere suggestion that there could have been a lab error which showed a false positive for the presence of explosives. Please see the case of the Maguire family. They were convicted soley on the basis of forensics showing explosives on their clothing, hands and household items. We know now that evidence was either planted, falsified, or in error. Annie Maguire and her children were not guilty in the bombings, but they were convicted and confined on the basis of the lab evidence. The judges cited impeccable lab results in denying the aquittals based on documentation that QA was in tact at the government forensic labs. Yet any QA program includes independent auditing of lab practices and QC documentation. If that ‘independent’ review and the documentation is in place for the time involved during the use of the contaminated centrifuge at the Sevenoaks, then clearly somebody at a fairly high up administrative level is not being honest about the incident. No, Jon. The problem does not lie with the lab technicians here. This fish is rotting from the head down and as much as the government would like to bury it, it won’t stop reeking to high heaven until they find out truth of the matter. Lynette
You are being very confused here, either deliberately or in error. The posting I replied to talked about the "authorities" and I really doubt if Britain is run by lab assistants. It may well be that the lab assistants who ran this equipment were incompetent, or even that they convered up their error, but it’s misleading to say that lab assistants are the "they" in question. jon.
jon What a bloody cop out. Ever hear of the expression the buck stops here. The Crown prosecutors, the police and other agencies involved in the cover up including the not so high and mighty Lords of the Crown are as culpable and guilty as the lab assistant. One does NOT take cases to court without evidence that is supposedly investigated, supported by other evidence, even circumstantial and guaranteed to be trustworthy. Thankfully we are not talking about death sentences here, otherwise we wouldn’t exactly have much to celebrate now would we? These corrupt, morally bankrupt law enforcement officials from the lab assistants to the judges have seen to it that many (debate the number…or just wait for the appellate rulings from Oh bejaysus the same corrupt Lords of the Crown) innocent people have been imprisoned for crimes they never commited. The excuse that so many seem to be parrotting right now "that we stopped them from carrying out their dirty deeds" is sickening. In a democracy one is considered innocent until proven guilty, not guilty anyway we can make it stick. For that reason we don’t lock up all males because they could possibly commit rape, or child molestation/abuse. Safety checks, double checks, blind runs are SOP (standard operating procedures) for any organization that involves machinary of any kind….that is why the navy, the army etc etc run tests on their equipment regularly in anticipation of readiness. These checks and balances are *supposed* to be for everyone’s benefit so that "accidents" i.e. false imprisonment, illegal convictions and falsely obtained "confessions" don’t get through to imprison innocent people. Like the plastic coverings on paying cards leaving "evidence" of bomb making, or beaten "confessions", altered police logs, and "shoot to kill" policies. The British judicial system is a farce, that isn’t justice and old Bailey needs a make-over…like yeah the Balcombe Street gang really did plant the bombs and not poor Guiseppe and his family and relatives. Cop on and start realising that what is being done in the Crown’s name is criminal and those that falsely obtained convictions should themselves be imprisoned…preferrably in the Republic…or better yet in the H Blocks with their falsely imprisoned victims. Cait
A stupid question, probably, but what are "the Lords of the Crown" ? PeterG in Toulouse
: A stupid question, probably, but what are "the Lords of the Crown" ? I kinda wondered about that – but I was also wondering how much of this story has been stretched and pounded to make it the "outrage" it is being painted. Get many messages from test servers, by the way?
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You are being very confused here, either deliberately or in error. The posting I replied to talked about the "authorities" and I really doubt if Britain is run by lab assistants. It may well be that the lab assistants who ran this equipment were incompetent, or even that they convered up their error, but it’s misleading to say that lab assistants are the "they" in question. jon. jon What a bloody cop out. Ever hear of the expression the buck stops here. The Crown prosecutors, the police and other agencies involved in the cover up including the not so high and mighty Lords of the Crown are as culpable and guilty as the lab assistant.
Hold it. What cover up? Do you have evidence at all that when the State reported the recent problems with centrifuge contamination, a cover-up was in progress? Please produce your evidence or stop making accusations. jon.
: You are being very confused here, either deliberately or in error. Sorry, Jon. I’ll try to outline it so you can understand. As I stated in my previous post, it’s not the lab techs, but those who administer the lab who need to answer to this. Sevenoaks is a government run forensics lab. As such, those who run the lab are government officials, not technicians. Any forensics lab would have a QC program in which known standards and blanks should have been run on the contaminated centrifuge equipment, but it doesn’t stop there. The lab would also have a quality assurance (QA) program in place as well- [etc, etc...]
It is very kind of you to explain it so that someone as stupid as I can understand it, but you seem to have forgotten one thing. I asked for evidence, and all I get is supposition. Your reasoning could apply equally to any such mishap. You could reason this way and conclude that someone "high up" must have concealed the bug that brought down the Ariane-5 the other day. After all, they have careful and independent testing, too, and they were proclaiming high reliability as well. And yet: *** BOOM *** Where is your evidence? You know, evidence is what we are talking about. jon.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – : What would you recommend? Keeping the results of the new test secret? That’s precisely what they seem to have done- sat on the information until they could no longer get away with it. Either because someone in the lab or higher up in the chain of command threatened to go public on their own about it. There has been plenty of opportunity to identify a contamination problem. At best the Crown prosecuters are criminally negligent. At worse they covered up and ignored evidence indicating that the equipment at Sevenoaks was contaminated. I work in a lab at a nuclear power plant. *Any* analysis that we do is done in conjunction with quality control checks. These checks are mostly done on a daily basis. We run them under the assumption that errors in our analyses will have serious implications on the plant’s capacity to run or on public safety.
You are being very confused here, either deliberately or in error. The posting I replied to talked about the "authorities" and I really doubt if Britain is run by lab assistants. It may well be that the lab assistants who ran this equipment were incompetent, or even that they convered up their error, but it’s misleading to say that lab assistants are the "they" in question. jon.
: What would you recommend? Keeping the results of the new test secret? That’s precisely what they seem to have done- sat on the information until they could no longer get away with it. Either because someone in the lab or higher up in the chain of command threatened to go public on their own about it. There has been plenty of opportunity to identify a contamination problem. At best the Crown prosecuters are criminally negligent. At worse they covered up and ignored evidence indicating that the equipment at Sevenoaks was contaminated. I work in a lab at a nuclear power plant. *Any* analysis that we do is done in conjunction with quality control checks. These checks are mostly done on a daily basis. We run them under the assumption that errors in our analyses will have serious implications on the plant’s capacity to run or on public safety. I must ask you, don’t the people who administer the forensics lab at Sevenoaks even acknowledge that the analyses they do have serious consequences one, to the public safety and two, to the lives of those who have been wrongly convicted and implicated? Don’t you think running an occasional QC or a blank on the contaminated equipment might have been in order? It’s very suspicious to me that in seven years there was never a blank run on the carrier in the centrifuge that was contaminated. Lynette
Why are you sending this bollocks to a newsgroup that is populated by people quite able to read Newspapers for themselves. It is not at all in keeping with the character of the group. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn’t Fit INTELLIGENCE ISSN 1245-2122 N. 38 New Series, 27 May 1996 Publishing since 1980 Editor Olivier Schmidt web http://www.blythe.org/Intelligence tel/fax 33 1 40 51 85 19; post ADI, 16 rue des Ecoles, 75005 Paris, France) British, Irish "Justice" Systems — Embarrassing Lapses Intelligence, N. 38, 27 May 1996, p. 3 ANOTHER BRITISH FORENSIC TECHNOLOGY ERROR FAVORS IRA British forensic technology is among the best in the world but seems to be applied in such a manner as to discredit authorities engaged in the fight against the IRA The famous Birmingham Six were released after a new forensic technique showed that police officers had rewritten their original notes to produce evidence for conviction. On 14 May, Home Secretary, Michael Howard, in reply to a written question in the House of Commons, recognized that the centrifuge, used to analyze the chemical composition of minute samples taken from suspects’ skin, hair, clothes, furniture and living quarters, was contaminated with 30 micrograms of RDX, one of the main chemical components of the plastic explosive Semtex. The ultra-centrifuge belongs to the Ministry of Defence’s Forensic Explosives Laboratory at Fort Halstead in Kent and had been used for seven years without being verified, despite routine weekly contamination checks of the laboratory room. Only two months ago a rubber pad was apparently replaced after an accident and, during the resulting test, the machine was found to be contaminated. The ultra-centrifuge has been used in 500 court cases since 1989 and heavy reliance on its results could put into question a dozen sentences involving 38 persons. Sinn Fein has advised all IRA prisoners indicted in Britain on explosive charges to appeal their convictions. It is now believed the centrifuge was contaminated before it arrived in the Fort Halstead laboratory. After the accidental spill of a strong, clean solvent from a test tube on the rubber pad at the bottom of the test-tube holder in the centrifuge, tests were run and found that the rubber pad contained traces of RDX, perhaps since its delivery to Fort Halstead. * Intelligence, N. 38, 27 May 1996, p. 39 IRELAND – Extradition Embarrassment. Business in the Irish Parliament — the Dail — was suspended twice on 22 May after Prime Minister, John Bruton, confirmed that a mistake in Dublin, not London, led to failure to extradite IRA suspect, Anthony Duncan, to Britain last month (INT, N. 36/16). It has now emerged that the original extradition warrant, sent to Dublin by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), was mistakenly shredded while photocopies were being made for the Garda. Mr. Bruton offered no explanation as to how this happened (presumably at the Department of Justice) or who authorized a misleading statement claiming the extradition request was rejected because the CPS failed to verify a signature on one of the British documents. The Irish police now want London to send original extradition documentation on colored paper to distinguish it from photocopies. According to a Garda spokesperson, it’s very hard "to make out the difference between an original and a good photocopy". In Northern Ireland, the Democratic Unionist leader, Dr. Ian Paisley, never one to miss an opportunity under such circumstances, said Dublin should offer a public apology to the CPS. * CHOICE BITS: Intelligence, N. 38, 27 May 1996, p. 7 RECONVERSION – Military to Civilian Simulation. The British Defence Research Agency Fort Halstead branch, the Centre for Defence Analysis, developed the Close Action Environment (CAEN) to simulate, by computer, urban war zones complete with trees, hedges, roads, fences and buildings. The Centre subsequently "reconverted" CAEN for the Surrey Police in Guildford for use in training police officers in handling angry crowds (INT, N. 22/7). This "reconversion" was considered a great success, and perhaps the U.S. Army learned from that when it decided to convert military simulation technology to civilian use. On 23 August 1995, the Army’s Project Plowshares simulation system "ran" a Category 3 hurricane over Orlando, Florida, to help civilian rescuers improve their disaster response. During the simulation, the fire department "forgot" to tell the sheriff’s office that a chlorine gas railroad tanker had derailed and leaked. The leak "disabled the police station", or more likely wiped it out. The authorities have supposedly learned from the exercise. * Intelligence, N. 38, 27 May 1996, p. 38 GREAT BRITAIN: REANALYZING CRIMINAL HISTORY The biggest murder hunt in British legal history began on 20 May when police reopened the files on the deaths and disappearances of up to 220 women. The police believe some of the murders — solved and unsolved — could be the work of five serial killers who have gone undetected since 1985. The hunt, codenamed Enigma, will be carried out by an "elite team of homicide detectives" headed by the Assistant Chief Constable of Essex, Jim Dickenson, and was proposed following the investigation into the killing of French student, Celine Figard, last December. It will be conducted along the guidelines, laid down in a confidential handbook recently issued by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) to senior Criminal Investigation Division (CID) officers in England and Wales, and will involve the National Criminal Intelligence Service (NCIS) and the recently-established Crime Faculty, which can provide "offender profiling" (INT, N. 35/4). [NOTE: Since the investigation of Figard's disappearance has included the British-occupied north of Ireland, "Enigma" would make a great cover for all manner of enhanced electronic information-gathering and covert operations there. -- NY Transfer] * Intelligence, N. 38, 27 May 1996, p. 37 LIMPING HOME FROM THE WAR GAMES The Labour Party is to question the Defence Secretary, Michael Portillo, and is seeking an inquiry into the American Port Authority decision to impound a 20,000-ton Ukrainian roll-on, roll-off ferry, the "Kapitan Mezentsev", chartered by the British Ministry of Defence (MoD) to carry supplies for British forces taking part in NATO’s Purple Star exercise, the largest joint U.S./British operation since the D-Day Normandy landing in 1944. The Americans declared the Ukrainian vessel unsafe after five major faults were found on inspection, including dilapidated fire-fighting equipment, cracks in fiberglass lifeboat hulls and inoperable watertight doors. The MoD confirmed that the ship had been hired for "a short term charter" but claimed it had been surveyed for the Royal Navy by a marine supervisor who found all the certificates and documentation in order "and no serious defects". Dr. David Clark, shadow defence spokesman, has suggested the MoD explanation is "untrue" — that is, a lie — since for a ship to be impounded "it has to be basically unseaworthy". He also argued that Britain’s defense budget had been cut to such an extent that the MoD has to go "to the bottom of the market" to charter vessels which put the lives of servicemen at risk. Some Tory backbenchers have also questioned the number of casualties suffered by British forces during Purple Star, in particular the 16 May night jump over Fort Bragg, North Carolina. Hyped by military strategists as the biggest Allied air drop since operation Market Garden over the Netherlands during World War II, the exercise injured 41 British paratroopers as compared to 38 U.S. casualties. Although this was fewer than the four percent casualties the planners had expected, the Tories are annoyed by reports that the landing ground for the U.S. Airborne was "flat terrain" while the British Paras were allocated an "uneven, shrub-covered area". A total of 38,200 U.S. and 15,600 British servicemen took part in Purple Star which ended on 19 May. The U.S. Air Force provided 171 aircraft and the RAF 56, the U.S. Navy 26 ships and the Royal Navy 27, including "HMS Fearless". The latter is the Royal Navy’s only control and communications command ship for amphibious operations, and managed to pass inspection after reports that NATO’s war games could be cancelled when workers discovered that large parts of the ship’s bulkhead had been eaten away by rust (INT, N. 30/43). * Copyright ADI 1996, reproduction in any form forbidden without explicit authorization from the ADI. A one year subscription (23 issues) is US $315. or point your browser to: http://www.blythe.org/Intelligence/ Also in this Issue: N. 38 New Series, 27 May 1996 FRONTPAGE BELGIUM – LOG OF AN INTELLIGENCE OVERSIGHT SHIPWRECK p.1 TECHNOLOGY & TECHNIQUES NEW TECHNIQUES ON BOTH SIDES OF DRUG BATTLE p.2 ANOTHER BRITISH FORENSIC TECHNOLOGY ERROR FAVORS IRA p.3 BOSNIA BECOMES INTELLIGENCE HIGH-TECH BAZAAR p.4 CURRENCY – Magnetic "Bar-Code" on New $100 Bills. p.5 IMAGERY – CIA "Dumps" Declassified Photos at USGS. p.6 RECONVERSION – Military to Civilian Simulation. p.7 GYPSIES – Open
… read more »
British forensic technology is among the best in the world but seems to be applied in such a manner as to discredit authorities engaged in the fight against the IRA The famous Birmingham Six were released after a new forensic technique showed that police officers had rewritten their original notes to produce evidence for conviction.
Pardon me? The state correctly reporting that a new forensic test reveals that police falsified evidence discredits the *authorities*? What would you recommend? Keeping the results of the new test secret? On 14 May, Home Secretary, Michael Howard, in reply to a written question in the House of Commons, recognized that the centrifuge, used to analyze the chemical composition of minute samples taken from suspects’ skin, hair, clothes, furniture and living quarters, was contaminated with 30 micrograms of RDX, one of the main chemical components of the plastic explosive Semtex.
And he reported it entirely properly, since it casts doubts on previous results obtained with this particular set of equipment. It does not discredit the aurthorities who reported these new results. It would be if they did *not* report it that they would be discredited. It might be a secret that they were discredited, but they would still be discredited. There seems to be a superstition among the US Left the reporting a problem that makes a conviction unsafe discredits the justice system that reports it. It does not. The justice systems to be wary of are those which never report such unsafe convictions. jon.
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn’t Fit INTELLIGENCE ISSN 1245-2122 N. 38 New Series, 27 May 1996 Publishing since 1980 Editor Olivier Schmidt web http://www.blythe.org/Intelligence tel/fax 33 1 40 51 85 19; post ADI, 16 rue des Ecoles, 75005 Paris, France) British, Irish "Justice" Systems — Embarrassing Lapses Intelligence, N. 38, 27 May 1996, p. 3 ANOTHER BRITISH FORENSIC TECHNOLOGY ERROR FAVORS IRA British forensic technology is among the best in the world but seems to be applied in such a manner as to discredit authorities engaged in the fight against the IRA The famous Birmingham Six were released after a new forensic technique showed that police officers had rewritten their original notes to produce evidence for conviction. On 14 May, Home Secretary, Michael Howard, in reply to a written question in the House of Commons, recognized that the centrifuge, used to analyze the chemical composition of minute samples taken from suspects’ skin, hair, clothes, furniture and living quarters, was contaminated with 30 micrograms of RDX, one of the main chemical components of the plastic explosive Semtex. The ultra-centrifuge belongs to the Ministry of Defence’s Forensic Explosives Laboratory at Fort Halstead in Kent and had been used for seven years without being verified, despite routine weekly contamination checks of the laboratory room. Only two months ago a rubber pad was apparently replaced after an accident and, during the resulting test, the machine was found to be contaminated. The ultra-centrifuge has been used in 500 court cases since 1989 and heavy reliance on its results could put into question a dozen sentences involving 38 persons. Sinn Fein has advised all IRA prisoners indicted in Britain on explosive charges to appeal their convictions. It is now believed the centrifuge was contaminated before it arrived in the Fort Halstead laboratory. After the accidental spill of a strong, clean solvent from a test tube on the rubber pad at the bottom of the test-tube holder in the centrifuge, tests were run and found that the rubber pad contained traces of RDX, perhaps since its delivery to Fort Halstead. * Intelligence, N. 38, 27 May 1996, p. 39 IRELAND – Extradition Embarrassment. Business in the Irish Parliament — the Dail — was suspended twice on 22 May after Prime Minister, John Bruton, confirmed that a mistake in Dublin, not London, led to failure to extradite IRA suspect, Anthony Duncan, to Britain last month (INT, N. 36/16). It has now emerged that the original extradition warrant, sent to Dublin by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), was mistakenly shredded while photocopies were being made for the Garda. Mr. Bruton offered no explanation as to how this happened (presumably at the Department of Justice) or who authorized a misleading statement claiming the extradition request was rejected because the CPS failed to verify a signature on one of the British documents. The Irish police now want London to send original extradition documentation on colored paper to distinguish it from photocopies. According to a Garda spokesperson, it’s very hard "to make out the difference between an original and a good photocopy". In Northern Ireland, the Democratic Unionist leader, Dr. Ian Paisley, never one to miss an opportunity under such circumstances, said Dublin should offer a public apology to the CPS. * CHOICE BITS: Intelligence, N. 38, 27 May 1996, p. 7 RECONVERSION – Military to Civilian Simulation. The British Defence Research Agency Fort Halstead branch, the Centre for Defence Analysis, developed the Close Action Environment (CAEN) to simulate, by computer, urban war zones complete with trees, hedges, roads, fences and buildings. The Centre subsequently "reconverted" CAEN for the Surrey Police in Guildford for use in training police officers in handling angry crowds (INT, N. 22/7). This "reconversion" was considered a great success, and perhaps the U.S. Army learned from that when it decided to convert military simulation technology to civilian use. On 23 August 1995, the Army’s Project Plowshares simulation system "ran" a Category 3 hurricane over Orlando, Florida, to help civilian rescuers improve their disaster response. During the simulation, the fire department "forgot" to tell the sheriff’s office that a chlorine gas railroad tanker had derailed and leaked. The leak "disabled the police station", or more likely wiped it out. The authorities have supposedly learned from the exercise. * Intelligence, N. 38, 27 May 1996, p. 38 GREAT BRITAIN: REANALYZING CRIMINAL HISTORY The biggest murder hunt in British legal history began on 20 May when police reopened the files on the deaths and disappearances of up to 220 women. The police believe some of the murders — solved and unsolved — could be the work of five serial killers who have gone undetected since 1985. The hunt, codenamed Enigma, will be carried out by an "elite team of homicide detectives" headed by the Assistant Chief Constable of Essex, Jim Dickenson, and was proposed following the investigation into the killing of French student, Celine Figard, last December. It will be conducted along the guidelines, laid down in a confidential handbook recently issued by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) to senior Criminal Investigation Division (CID) officers in England and Wales, and will involve the National Criminal Intelligence Service (NCIS) and the recently-established Crime Faculty, which can provide "offender profiling" (INT, N. 35/4). [NOTE: Since the investigation of Figard's disappearance has included the British-occupied north of Ireland, "Enigma" would make a great cover for all manner of enhanced electronic information-gathering and covert operations there. -- NY Transfer] * Intelligence, N. 38, 27 May 1996, p. 37 LIMPING HOME FROM THE WAR GAMES The Labour Party is to question the Defence Secretary, Michael Portillo, and is seeking an inquiry into the American Port Authority decision to impound a 20,000-ton Ukrainian roll-on, roll-off ferry, the "Kapitan Mezentsev", chartered by the British Ministry of Defence (MoD) to carry supplies for British forces taking part in NATO’s Purple Star exercise, the largest joint U.S./British operation since the D-Day Normandy landing in 1944. The Americans declared the Ukrainian vessel unsafe after five major faults were found on inspection, including dilapidated fire-fighting equipment, cracks in fiberglass lifeboat hulls and inoperable watertight doors. The MoD confirmed that the ship had been hired for "a short term charter" but claimed it had been surveyed for the Royal Navy by a marine supervisor who found all the certificates and documentation in order "and no serious defects". Dr. David Clark, shadow defence spokesman, has suggested the MoD explanation is "untrue" — that is, a lie — since for a ship to be impounded "it has to be basically unseaworthy". He also argued that Britain’s defense budget had been cut to such an extent that the MoD has to go "to the bottom of the market" to charter vessels which put the lives of servicemen at risk. Some Tory backbenchers have also questioned the number of casualties suffered by British forces during Purple Star, in particular the 16 May night jump over Fort Bragg, North Carolina. Hyped by military strategists as the biggest Allied air drop since operation Market Garden over the Netherlands during World War II, the exercise injured 41 British paratroopers as compared to 38 U.S. casualties. Although this was fewer than the four percent casualties the planners had expected, the Tories are annoyed by reports that the landing ground for the U.S. Airborne was "flat terrain" while the British Paras were allocated an "uneven, shrub-covered area". A total of 38,200 U.S. and 15,600 British servicemen took part in Purple Star which ended on 19 May. The U.S. Air Force provided 171 aircraft and the RAF 56, the U.S. Navy 26 ships and the Royal Navy 27, including "HMS Fearless". The latter is the Royal Navy’s only control and communications command ship for amphibious operations, and managed to pass inspection after reports that NATO’s war games could be cancelled when workers discovered that large parts of the ship’s bulkhead had been eaten away by rust (INT, N. 30/43). * Copyright ADI 1996, reproduction in any form forbidden without explicit authorization from the ADI. A one year subscription (23 issues) is US $315. or point your browser to: http://www.blythe.org/Intelligence/ Also in this Issue: N. 38 New Series, 27 May 1996 FRONTPAGE BELGIUM – LOG OF AN INTELLIGENCE OVERSIGHT SHIPWRECK p.1 TECHNOLOGY & TECHNIQUES NEW TECHNIQUES ON BOTH SIDES OF DRUG BATTLE p.2 ANOTHER BRITISH FORENSIC TECHNOLOGY ERROR FAVORS IRA p.3 BOSNIA BECOMES INTELLIGENCE HIGH-TECH BAZAAR p.4 CURRENCY – Magnetic "Bar-Code" on New $100 Bills. p.5 IMAGERY – CIA "Dumps" Declassified Photos at USGS. p.6 RECONVERSION – Military to Civilian Simulation. p.7 GYPSIES – Open Source Law Enforcement Study. p.8 RADAR – U.S. Navy Gets Its Own SAR. p.9 COMPUTER CRIME – Another "Honest" Survey. p.10 STEALTH – "Baby Beluga" Takes a Curtain Call. p.11 INTERNET – Java Just a Little Too Hot. p.12 COMPUTERS – A 50th Birthday for "Baby". p.13 PEOPLE MELVIN A. GOODMAN – U.S.A. p.14 NICOLAS BLAZIANU – FRANCE/SWITZERLAND p.15 LEON GIET – BELGIUM p.16 HASSAN SALAMEH – PALESTINE p.17 U.S.A. – Intelligence Internships. p.18 CANADA/SRI LANKA – Kumaravelu Vignarajah. p.19 GREAT BRITAIN – "Mr. X". p.20 NORTHERN IRELAND – Dessie Mccleary. p.21 FRANCE – Philippe Rondot. p.22 ESTONIA/RUSSIA – Sergei Andreev. p.23 BULGARIA – … read more »