info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
property tax check sent in December 2017 but not cashed until January 2018. Deductible?
107 views
Skip to first unread message
Jane
Jan 1, 2018, 2:39:47 PM1/1/18
to
Subject line about sums it up. It was dumb on my part not to realize that there was a chance the check would not get processed before the end of the year even though I mailed it on December 27.
So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or the date it's cashed?
I am aware of the other regulations in the new tax bill.
Thank you for your help.
--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >>
<< nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >>
<< that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >>
<< >>
<< The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >>
<< to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >>
<< are at www.asktax.org. >>
<< Copyright (2011) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or the date it's cashed?
I am aware of the other regulations in the new tax bill.
Thank you for your help.
--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >>
<< nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >>
<< that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >>
<< >>
<< The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >>
<< to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >>
<< are at www.asktax.org. >>
<< Copyright (2011) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
Stuart O. Bronstein
Jan 1, 2018, 4:49:57 PM1/1/18
to
Jane <jbl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Subject line about sums it up. It was dumb on my part not to
> realize that there was a chance the check would not get processed
> before the end of the year even though I mailed it on December 27.
>
> So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or
> the date it's cashed?
You sent it in time for them to receive it and cash it before the end
> Subject line about sums it up. It was dumb on my part not to
> realize that there was a chance the check would not get processed
> before the end of the year even though I mailed it on December 27.
>
> So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or
> the date it's cashed?
of the year, so you should be able to treat it as paid this year. The
fact that they delayed isn't your problem.
--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com
lotax
Jan 2, 2018, 12:05:26 AM1/2/18
to
>
> So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or the date it's cashed?
>
*Neither*. If you mailed the check, the date the *post office* received the check is the date the payment is considered "paid" for tax purposes.
> So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or the date it's cashed?
>
*Proving* that date is a separate problem.
Stan Brown
Jan 2, 2018, 7:30:57 AM1/2/18
to
On Mon, 1 Jan 2018 14:36:39 EST, Jane wrote:
> Subject line about sums it up. It was dumb on my part not to
> realize that there was a chance the check would not get processed
> before the end of the year even though I mailed it on December 27.
>
> So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or
> the date it's cashed?
If I understand you, you're talking about a paper check sent via us
> Subject line about sums it up. It was dumb on my part not to
> realize that there was a chance the check would not get processed
> before the end of the year even though I mailed it on December 27.
>
> So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or
> the date it's cashed?
postal Service. In that case, it doesn't matter when you mailed it or
when they cashed it; the postmark is what matters. Presumably you
mailed it in time to be postmarked in 2017.
I wonder if taxing authorities actually save envelopes, or images of
them, in case of disputed postmarks. I played it safe and paid my
early property taxes in person at the clerk's office, where I got a
receipt.
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://BrownMath.com/
http://OakRoadSystems.com/
Shikata ga nai...
ira smilovitz
Jan 2, 2018, 11:41:13 AM1/2/18
to
On Tuesday, January 2, 2018 at 7:30:57 AM UTC-5, Stan Brown wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Jan 2018 14:36:39 EST, Jane wrote:
> > Subject line about sums it up. It was dumb on my part not to
> > realize that there was a chance the check would not get processed
> > before the end of the year even though I mailed it on December 27.
> >
> > So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or
> > the date it's cashed?
>
> If I understand you, you're talking about a paper check sent via us
> postal Service. In that case, it doesn't matter when you mailed it or
> when they cashed it; the postmark is what matters. Presumably you
> mailed it in time to be postmarked in 2017.
>
> I wonder if taxing authorities actually save envelopes, or images of
> them, in case of disputed postmarks. I played it safe and paid my
> early property taxes in person at the clerk's office, where I got a
> receipt.
>
> --
> Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
> http://BrownMath.com/
> http://OakRoadSystems.com/
> Shikata ga nai...
>
> --
I ALWAYS tell my clients that they should send any tax payment using certified mail. The extra few dollars is a cheap insurance policy should they ever need to prove a mailing date.
> On Mon, 1 Jan 2018 14:36:39 EST, Jane wrote:
> > Subject line about sums it up. It was dumb on my part not to
> > realize that there was a chance the check would not get processed
> > before the end of the year even though I mailed it on December 27.
> >
> > So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or
> > the date it's cashed?
>
> If I understand you, you're talking about a paper check sent via us
> postal Service. In that case, it doesn't matter when you mailed it or
> when they cashed it; the postmark is what matters. Presumably you
> mailed it in time to be postmarked in 2017.
>
> I wonder if taxing authorities actually save envelopes, or images of
> them, in case of disputed postmarks. I played it safe and paid my
> early property taxes in person at the clerk's office, where I got a
> receipt.
>
> --
> Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
> http://BrownMath.com/
> http://OakRoadSystems.com/
> Shikata ga nai...
>
> --
Ira Smilovitz, EA
njoracle
Jan 2, 2018, 11:46:13 AM1/2/18
to
Jane wrote:
> Subject line about sums it up. It was dumb on my part not to realize that there was a chance the check would not get processed before the end of the year even though I mailed it on December 27.
>
> So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or the date it's cashed?
>
> I am aware of the other regulations in the new tax bill.
>
> Thank you for your help.
>
To be on the safe side, you could have purchased a Certificate of Mailing for $1.35 as described
> Subject line about sums it up. It was dumb on my part not to realize that there was a chance the check would not get processed before the end of the year even though I mailed it on December 27.
>
> So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or the date it's cashed?
>
> I am aware of the other regulations in the new tax bill.
>
> Thank you for your help.
>
here: https://support.shippingeasy.com/hc/en-us/articles/206170743-What-is-a-Certificate-of-Mailing-
ira smilovitz
Jan 2, 2018, 3:31:29 PM1/2/18
to
On Tuesday, January 2, 2018 at 11:46:13 AM UTC-5, njoracle wrote:
> Jane wrote:
> > Subject line about sums it up. It was dumb on my part not to realize that there was a chance the check would not get processed before the end of the year even though I mailed it on December 27.
> >
> > So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or the date it's cashed?
> >
> > I am aware of the other regulations in the new tax bill.
> >
> > Thank you for your help.
> >
>
> To be on the safe side, you could have purchased a Certificate of Mailing for $1.35 as described
> here: https://support.shippingeasy.com/hc/en-us/articles/206170743-What-is-a-Certificate-of-Mailing-
>
> --
A certificate of mailing isn't sufficient. Although the USPS says it offers proof of mailing, the IRS explicitly states what they will accept as proof of mailing. Despite statements on the USPS website, the IRS does not include the USPS Certificate of Mailing as proof of mailing. (See 26 CFR 301.7502.1 for the relevant IRS regulation)
> Jane wrote:
> > Subject line about sums it up. It was dumb on my part not to realize that there was a chance the check would not get processed before the end of the year even though I mailed it on December 27.
> >
> > So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or the date it's cashed?
> >
> > I am aware of the other regulations in the new tax bill.
> >
> > Thank you for your help.
> >
>
> To be on the safe side, you could have purchased a Certificate of Mailing for $1.35 as described
> here: https://support.shippingeasy.com/hc/en-us/articles/206170743-What-is-a-Certificate-of-Mailing-
>
> --
Ira Smilovitz, EA
John Levine
Jan 2, 2018, 4:21:32 PM1/2/18
to
In article <MPG.34b53ac3e...@news.individual.net>,
get pix of your incoming mail via something called Informed Delivery.
It's quite creepy.
But since I have no idea whether you can go back and ask for those
pictures, don't waste money on certified mail and instead get a
certificate of mailing, which is a little slip of paper (PS3817) with
sender and recipient's address and a spot where the PO postmarks it.
A certificate of mailing is $1.35, certified mail is $3.35.
For the overeager, here's a printable PS3817 you can customize
with your return address:
https://about.usps.com/forms/ps3817.pdf
R's,
John
--
Regards,
John Levine, jo...@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>I wonder if taxing authorities actually save envelopes, or images of
>them, in case of disputed postmarks. I played it safe and paid my
>early property taxes in person at the clerk's office, where I got a
>receipt.
The post office takes pictures of every envelope. You can sign up to
>I wonder if taxing authorities actually save envelopes, or images of
>them, in case of disputed postmarks. I played it safe and paid my
>early property taxes in person at the clerk's office, where I got a
>receipt.
get pix of your incoming mail via something called Informed Delivery.
It's quite creepy.
But since I have no idea whether you can go back and ask for those
pictures, don't waste money on certified mail and instead get a
certificate of mailing, which is a little slip of paper (PS3817) with
sender and recipient's address and a spot where the PO postmarks it.
A certificate of mailing is $1.35, certified mail is $3.35.
For the overeager, here's a printable PS3817 you can customize
with your return address:
https://about.usps.com/forms/ps3817.pdf
R's,
John
--
Regards,
John Levine, jo...@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
ira smilovitz
Jan 2, 2018, 5:23:52 PM1/2/18
to
Ira Smilovitz, EA
Arthur Rubin
Jan 2, 2018, 9:54:07 PM1/2/18
to
On Tuesday, January 2, 2018 at 12:31:29 PM UTC-8, ira smilovitz wrote:
> A certificate of mailing isn't sufficient. Although the USPS says it offers proof of mailing, the IRS explicitly states what they will accept as proof of mailing. Despite statements on the USPS website, the IRS does not include the USPS Certificate of Mailing as proof of mailing. (See 26 CFR 301.7502.1 for the relevant IRS regulation)
>
26 CFR 301.7502-1 applies to mailings to the IRS. It doesn't seem applicable to mailings to other organizations.
> A certificate of mailing isn't sufficient. Although the USPS says it offers proof of mailing, the IRS explicitly states what they will accept as proof of mailing. Despite statements on the USPS website, the IRS does not include the USPS Certificate of Mailing as proof of mailing. (See 26 CFR 301.7502.1 for the relevant IRS regulation)
>
--
Arthur L. Rubin, Brea, CA
John Levine
Jan 2, 2018, 11:29:12 PM1/2/18
to
In article <ec7961c9-ccdc-4399...@googlegroups.com>,
R's,
John
--
Regards,
John Levine, jo...@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
ira smilovitz <ira.sm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>A certificate of mailing isn't sufficient. Although the USPS says it offers proof of mailing, the
>IRS explicitly states what they will accept as proof of mailing. Despite statements on the USPS
>website, the IRS does not include the USPS Certificate of Mailing as proof of mailing. (See 26 CFR
>301.7502.1 for the relevant IRS regulation)
By golly, you're right. Talk about the left hand not knowing what the right hand does.
>A certificate of mailing isn't sufficient. Although the USPS says it offers proof of mailing, the
>IRS explicitly states what they will accept as proof of mailing. Despite statements on the USPS
>website, the IRS does not include the USPS Certificate of Mailing as proof of mailing. (See 26 CFR
>301.7502.1 for the relevant IRS regulation)
R's,
John
--
Regards,
John Levine, jo...@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
Jane
Jan 4, 2018, 11:31:25 AM1/4/18
to
On Monday, January 1, 2018 at 2:39:47 PM UTC-5, Jane wrote:
> Subject line about sums it up. It was dumb on my part not to realize that there was a chance the check would not get processed before the end of the year even though I mailed it on December 27.
>
> So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or the date it's cashed?
>
> I am aware of the other regulations in the new tax bill.
>
> Thank you for your help.
So, I got an email today from the tax collector's office saying my check arrived in their office on January 2. That would not have been possible if I had mailed it in 2018 since the Post Office is closed on January 1. Might this be enough?
> Subject line about sums it up. It was dumb on my part not to realize that there was a chance the check would not get processed before the end of the year even though I mailed it on December 27.
>
> So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or the date it's cashed?
>
> I am aware of the other regulations in the new tax bill.
>
> Thank you for your help.
I have never lied on my returns or been audited. I don't want to start now.
ira smilovitz
Jan 4, 2018, 12:41:28 PM1/4/18
to
On Thursday, January 4, 2018 at 11:31:25 AM UTC-5, Jane wrote:
> On Monday, January 1, 2018 at 2:39:47 PM UTC-5, Jane wrote:
> > Subject line about sums it up. It was dumb on my part not to realize that there was a chance the check would not get processed before the end of the year even though I mailed it on December 27.
> >
> > So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or the date it's cashed?
> >
> > I am aware of the other regulations in the new tax bill.
> >
> > Thank you for your help.
>
> So, I got an email today from the tax collector's office saying my check arrived in their office on January 2. That would not have been possible if I had mailed it in 2018 since the Post Office is closed on January 1. Might this be enough?
>
> I have never lied on my returns or been audited. I don't want to start now.
>
> --
If the IRS chooses to question your deduction and sticks to the letter of the law/regulation, the email won't be sufficient proof. By not following the IRS instructions for establishing proof of mailing, there is a very small, but non-zero, risk that the deduction could be denied.
> On Monday, January 1, 2018 at 2:39:47 PM UTC-5, Jane wrote:
> > Subject line about sums it up. It was dumb on my part not to realize that there was a chance the check would not get processed before the end of the year even though I mailed it on December 27.
> >
> > So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or the date it's cashed?
> >
> > I am aware of the other regulations in the new tax bill.
> >
> > Thank you for your help.
>
> So, I got an email today from the tax collector's office saying my check arrived in their office on January 2. That would not have been possible if I had mailed it in 2018 since the Post Office is closed on January 1. Might this be enough?
>
> I have never lied on my returns or been audited. I don't want to start now.
>
> --
Ira Smilovitz, EA
Taxed and Spent
Jan 4, 2018, 1:11:30 PM1/4/18
to
On 1/4/2018 9:39 AM, ira smilovitz wrote:
> On Thursday, January 4, 2018 at 11:31:25 AM UTC-5, Jane wrote:
>> On Monday, January 1, 2018 at 2:39:47 PM UTC-5, Jane wrote:
>>> Subject line about sums it up. It was dumb on my part not to realize that there was a chance the check would not get processed before the end of the year even though I mailed it on December 27.
>>>
>>> So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or the date it's cashed?
>>>
>>> I am aware of the other regulations in the new tax bill.
>>>
>>> Thank you for your help.
>>
>> So, I got an email today from the tax collector's office saying my check arrived in their office on January 2. That would not have been possible if I had mailed it in 2018 since the Post Office is closed on January 1. Might this be enough?
>>
>> I have never lied on my returns or been audited. I don't want to start now.
>>
>> --
>
> If the IRS chooses to question your deduction and sticks to the letter of the law/regulation, the email won't be sufficient proof. By not following the IRS instructions for establishing proof of mailing, there is a very small, but non-zero, risk that the deduction could be denied.
>
> Ira Smilovitz, EA
>
The IRS rule you refer to pertains to payments made to the IRS. That is
> On Thursday, January 4, 2018 at 11:31:25 AM UTC-5, Jane wrote:
>> On Monday, January 1, 2018 at 2:39:47 PM UTC-5, Jane wrote:
>>> Subject line about sums it up. It was dumb on my part not to realize that there was a chance the check would not get processed before the end of the year even though I mailed it on December 27.
>>>
>>> So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or the date it's cashed?
>>>
>>> I am aware of the other regulations in the new tax bill.
>>>
>>> Thank you for your help.
>>
>> So, I got an email today from the tax collector's office saying my check arrived in their office on January 2. That would not have been possible if I had mailed it in 2018 since the Post Office is closed on January 1. Might this be enough?
>>
>> I have never lied on my returns or been audited. I don't want to start now.
>>
>> --
>
> If the IRS chooses to question your deduction and sticks to the letter of the law/regulation, the email won't be sufficient proof. By not following the IRS instructions for establishing proof of mailing, there is a very small, but non-zero, risk that the deduction could be denied.
>
> Ira Smilovitz, EA
>
not what OP is asking about. Common sense should dictate in other cases.
I doubt the IRS will be questioning the MILLIONS of December property
tax payments made in 2017, and if they do taxpayers word and evidence
such as mentioned by OP should suffice.
lotax
Jan 4, 2018, 5:46:46 PM1/4/18
to
Taxed and Spent writes, above, that the IRS rule that Ira Smilovitz refers to pertains to payments made to the IRS.
T&S, can you show us where that rule is that says it refers only to payments to the IRS?
T&S, can you show us where that rule is that says it refers only to payments to the IRS?
Taxed and Spent
Jan 4, 2018, 7:41:52 PM1/4/18
to
On 1/4/2018 2:44 PM, lotax wrote:
> Taxed and Spent writes, above, that the IRS rule that Ira Smilovitz refers to pertains to payments made to the IRS.
>
> T&S, can you show us where that rule is that says it refers only to payments to the IRS?
>
Read the definition of "payment" contained in that code section.
> Taxed and Spent writes, above, that the IRS rule that Ira Smilovitz refers to pertains to payments made to the IRS.
>
> T&S, can you show us where that rule is that says it refers only to payments to the IRS?
>
ira smilovitz
Jan 4, 2018, 8:06:53 PM1/4/18
to
On Thursday, January 4, 2018 at 1:11:30 PM UTC-5, Taxed and Spent wrote:
> On 1/4/2018 9:39 AM, ira smilovitz wrote:
> > On Thursday, January 4, 2018 at 11:31:25 AM UTC-5, Jane wrote:
> >> On Monday, January 1, 2018 at 2:39:47 PM UTC-5, Jane wrote:
> >>> Subject line about sums it up. It was dumb on my part not to realize that there was a chance the check would not get processed before the end of the year even though I mailed it on December 27.
> >>>
> >>> So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or the date it's cashed?
> >>>
> >>> I am aware of the other regulations in the new tax bill.
> >>>
> >>> Thank you for your help.
> >>
> >> So, I got an email today from the tax collector's office saying my check arrived in their office on January 2. That would not have been possible if I had mailed it in 2018 since the Post Office is closed on January 1. Might this be enough?
> >>
> >> I have never lied on my returns or been audited. I don't want to start now.
> >>
> >> --
> >
> > If the IRS chooses to question your deduction and sticks to the letter of the law/regulation, the email won't be sufficient proof. By not following the IRS instructions for establishing proof of mailing, there is a very small, but non-zero, risk that the deduction could be denied.
> >
> > Ira Smilovitz, EA
> >
>
>
> The IRS rule you refer to pertains to payments made to the IRS. That is
> not what OP is asking about. Common sense should dictate in other cases.
> I doubt the IRS will be questioning the MILLIONS of December property
> tax payments made in 2017, and if they do taxpayers word and evidence
> such as mentioned by OP should suffice.
>
> --
I don't disagree with you that the IRS is unlikely to do anything regarding 2017 RE tax payments, but the fact is, the IRS *could* do just that. Each year the IRS chooses where to focus its examination efforts. It may decide that Concepts like "should" are of little comfort if the IRS decides otherwise. Common sense and the tax code are not compatible concepts. It wouldn't take much effort for the IRS to program its computers to flag any return where RE tax claimed in 2017 is significantly greater than 2016, and generate a CP letter asking for more information. Again, I'm not suggesting the IRS will/would do this, but they could.
> On 1/4/2018 9:39 AM, ira smilovitz wrote:
> > On Thursday, January 4, 2018 at 11:31:25 AM UTC-5, Jane wrote:
> >> On Monday, January 1, 2018 at 2:39:47 PM UTC-5, Jane wrote:
> >>> Subject line about sums it up. It was dumb on my part not to realize that there was a chance the check would not get processed before the end of the year even though I mailed it on December 27.
> >>>
> >>> So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or the date it's cashed?
> >>>
> >>> I am aware of the other regulations in the new tax bill.
> >>>
> >>> Thank you for your help.
> >>
> >> So, I got an email today from the tax collector's office saying my check arrived in their office on January 2. That would not have been possible if I had mailed it in 2018 since the Post Office is closed on January 1. Might this be enough?
> >>
> >> I have never lied on my returns or been audited. I don't want to start now.
> >>
> >> --
> >
> > If the IRS chooses to question your deduction and sticks to the letter of the law/regulation, the email won't be sufficient proof. By not following the IRS instructions for establishing proof of mailing, there is a very small, but non-zero, risk that the deduction could be denied.
> >
> > Ira Smilovitz, EA
> >
>
>
> The IRS rule you refer to pertains to payments made to the IRS. That is
> not what OP is asking about. Common sense should dictate in other cases.
> I doubt the IRS will be questioning the MILLIONS of December property
> tax payments made in 2017, and if they do taxpayers word and evidence
> such as mentioned by OP should suffice.
>
> --
Ira Smilovitz, EA
Taxed and Spent
Jan 4, 2018, 9:26:58 PM1/4/18
to
On 1/4/2018 5:05 PM, ira smilovitz wrote:
> On Thursday, January 4, 2018 at 1:11:30 PM UTC-5, Taxed and Spent wrote:
>> On 1/4/2018 9:39 AM, ira smilovitz wrote:
>>> On Thursday, January 4, 2018 at 11:31:25 AM UTC-5, Jane wrote:
>>>> On Monday, January 1, 2018 at 2:39:47 PM UTC-5, Jane wrote:
>>>>> Subject line about sums it up. It was dumb on my part not to realize that there was a chance the check would not get processed before the end of the year even though I mailed it on December 27.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or the date it's cashed?
>>>>>
>>>>> I am aware of the other regulations in the new tax bill.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you for your help.
>>>>
>>>> So, I got an email today from the tax collector's office saying my check arrived in their office on January 2. That would not have been possible if I had mailed it in 2018 since the Post Office is closed on January 1. Might this be enough?
>>>>
>>>> I have never lied on my returns or been audited. I don't want to start now.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>
>>> If the IRS chooses to question your deduction and sticks to the letter of the law/regulation, the email won't be sufficient proof. By not following the IRS instructions for establishing proof of mailing, there is a very small, but non-zero, risk that the deduction could be denied.
>>>
>>> Ira Smilovitz, EA
>>>
>>
>>
>> The IRS rule you refer to pertains to payments made to the IRS. That is
>> not what OP is asking about. Common sense should dictate in other cases.
>> I doubt the IRS will be questioning the MILLIONS of December property
>> tax payments made in 2017, and if they do taxpayers word and evidence
>> such as mentioned by OP should suffice.
>>
>> --
>
> I don't disagree with you that the IRS is unlikely to do anything regarding 2017 RE tax payments, but the fact is, the IRS *could* do just that. Each year the IRS chooses where to focus its examination efforts. It may decide that Concepts like "should" are of little comfort if the IRS decides otherwise. Common sense and the tax code are not compatible concepts. It wouldn't take much effort for the IRS to program its computers to flag any return where RE tax claimed in 2017 is significantly greater than 2016, and generate a CP letter asking for more information. Again, I'm not suggesting the IRS will/would do this, but they could.
>
> Ira Smilovitz, EA
>
There is no way the IRS would do that. They must realize that their
> On Thursday, January 4, 2018 at 1:11:30 PM UTC-5, Taxed and Spent wrote:
>> On 1/4/2018 9:39 AM, ira smilovitz wrote:
>>> On Thursday, January 4, 2018 at 11:31:25 AM UTC-5, Jane wrote:
>>>> On Monday, January 1, 2018 at 2:39:47 PM UTC-5, Jane wrote:
>>>>> Subject line about sums it up. It was dumb on my part not to realize that there was a chance the check would not get processed before the end of the year even though I mailed it on December 27.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or the date it's cashed?
>>>>>
>>>>> I am aware of the other regulations in the new tax bill.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you for your help.
>>>>
>>>> So, I got an email today from the tax collector's office saying my check arrived in their office on January 2. That would not have been possible if I had mailed it in 2018 since the Post Office is closed on January 1. Might this be enough?
>>>>
>>>> I have never lied on my returns or been audited. I don't want to start now.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>
>>> If the IRS chooses to question your deduction and sticks to the letter of the law/regulation, the email won't be sufficient proof. By not following the IRS instructions for establishing proof of mailing, there is a very small, but non-zero, risk that the deduction could be denied.
>>>
>>> Ira Smilovitz, EA
>>>
>>
>>
>> The IRS rule you refer to pertains to payments made to the IRS. That is
>> not what OP is asking about. Common sense should dictate in other cases.
>> I doubt the IRS will be questioning the MILLIONS of December property
>> tax payments made in 2017, and if they do taxpayers word and evidence
>> such as mentioned by OP should suffice.
>>
>> --
>
> I don't disagree with you that the IRS is unlikely to do anything regarding 2017 RE tax payments, but the fact is, the IRS *could* do just that. Each year the IRS chooses where to focus its examination efforts. It may decide that Concepts like "should" are of little comfort if the IRS decides otherwise. Common sense and the tax code are not compatible concepts. It wouldn't take much effort for the IRS to program its computers to flag any return where RE tax claimed in 2017 is significantly greater than 2016, and generate a CP letter asking for more information. Again, I'm not suggesting the IRS will/would do this, but they could.
>
> Ira Smilovitz, EA
>
success rate would be extremely low, and to send out CP letters to
millions in the hope of catching a handful would really be rubbing SALT
in the wounds.
ira smilovitz
Jan 4, 2018, 11:02:03 PM1/4/18
to
Ira Smilovitz, EA
Barry Margolin
Jan 5, 2018, 12:32:42 PM1/5/18
to
In article <30a1e649-ccaf-4a74...@googlegroups.com>,
sending out the letters would be cheap, investigating when taxpayers
reply would not.
Prepaying property taxes in December has been common practice for many
years, whenever a taxpayer anticipates that their tax situation is going
to change in the new year, so I expect the IRS already has procedures in
place for this. The only difference now is that there's likely to be a
big upsurge because the tax bill affects so many people. But the IRS
didn't have much warning, and they didn't get any kind of budget
increase, so it seems unlikely that they'd be able to do anything to try
to take advantage of people not having legitimate documentation of the
transmission date.
--
Barry Margolin
Arlington, MA
ira smilovitz <ira.sm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, January 4, 2018 at 9:26:58 PM UTC-5, Taxed and Spent wrote:
> > There is no way the IRS would do that. They must realize that their
> > success rate would be extremely low, and to send out CP letters to
> > millions in the hope of catching a handful would really be rubbing SALT
> > in the wounds.
> >
> > --
>
> With the current administration, anything is possible. The success rate is
> irrelevant. Since the CP letters are sent out without human intervention,
> there is nothing but taxpayer animosity to risk. The disagreement between the
> two of us is simply that you believe that common sense will prevail and I am
> trying to point out that if common sense fails there are real consequences.
> Deep down, I agree that common sense will prevail.
The IRS budget has been slashed significantly in recent years. While
> On Thursday, January 4, 2018 at 9:26:58 PM UTC-5, Taxed and Spent wrote:
> > There is no way the IRS would do that. They must realize that their
> > success rate would be extremely low, and to send out CP letters to
> > millions in the hope of catching a handful would really be rubbing SALT
> > in the wounds.
> >
> > --
>
> With the current administration, anything is possible. The success rate is
> irrelevant. Since the CP letters are sent out without human intervention,
> there is nothing but taxpayer animosity to risk. The disagreement between the
> two of us is simply that you believe that common sense will prevail and I am
> trying to point out that if common sense fails there are real consequences.
> Deep down, I agree that common sense will prevail.
sending out the letters would be cheap, investigating when taxpayers
reply would not.
Prepaying property taxes in December has been common practice for many
years, whenever a taxpayer anticipates that their tax situation is going
to change in the new year, so I expect the IRS already has procedures in
place for this. The only difference now is that there's likely to be a
big upsurge because the tax bill affects so many people. But the IRS
didn't have much warning, and they didn't get any kind of budget
increase, so it seems unlikely that they'd be able to do anything to try
to take advantage of people not having legitimate documentation of the
transmission date.
--
Barry Margolin
Arlington, MA
Jane
Jan 5, 2018, 12:32:42 PM1/5/18
to
On Monday, January 1, 2018 at 2:39:47 PM UTC-5, Jane wrote:
> Subject line about sums it up. It was dumb on my part not to realize that there was a chance the check would not get processed before the end of the year even though I mailed it on December 27.
>
> So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or the date it's cashed?
>
> I am aware of the other regulations in the new tax bill.
>
> Thank you for your help.
Thank you all!!
>
> So, for tax purposes, is payment on the date I wrote the check or the date it's cashed?
>
> I am aware of the other regulations in the new tax bill.
>
> Thank you for your help.
0 new messages