New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by this-mama-rocks

"You never did comment on the benefits of hiring an attorney for $500 to save $100"My point was: most CPAs have little to no training in this area, and if you want accurate, professional guidance in this area, you would have to hire a consultant, lawyer, or other service that specializes in the field.I merely pointed out those professionals as an option. I did not say that was what anyone "should" do. I did not say that a $100 tax bill was worth a $500 attorney bill.
Paying the tax is not what will kill a small business. The penalties and interest usually doubled a taxpayer's assessment, and sometimes tripled it. Wow, you are just so......condescending, snotty, and defensive when someone else has something to contribute. Your responses to my posts don't even align with what I have tried to say or explain. I see it really bothers you to not have the last word, even if it contradicts what you said 2 minutes beforehand.
Which is why I tried to offer some specific, detailed advice, for free - instead of my previous $150/hour rate.
Keeping good records is only part of the answer. Knowing the tax codes that affect your business, and using that knowledge to reduce your tax/penalty/interest exposure is the other part. And as I mentioned, most CPA's do not have sales/tax training. You have to retain a sales/use tax consultant, lawyer, or accrual/payment service. Your two-sided advice to ask a CPA, then bashing CPAs is confusing. Sales/use taxe auditors have a perverse glee in exploiting a taxpayer's...
And CPA's are usually NOT trained in the world of sales and use taxes. I audited many, MANY taxpayers who shrieked at me about WHY didn't their CPA tell them about this???!!!!!It's better to give someone more information than they can handle, than to give them less information than they need. In my educated opinion.
And OP knew all your assumptions...how?The answers to your questions about in-state purchases was addressed pretty thoroughly in the other thread. It's a pretty lengthly explanation.
And the next sentence reads "In those instances, Jason, additional use tax WOULD be due on those transactions.". Which means "no use tax would be owed on those transactions" is not true.
There was no disagreement on the other thread. Jason had asked for clarification and explanation on sales/use tax situations, and I freely answered all questions. "Simplicity may be key", but if a CC member makes the "vast majority" of purchases online, or pays a non-reciprocity neighboring state's sales tax on "most" purchases, that CC member may be in for a very rude awakening come audit time. In those instances, Jason, additional use tax WOULD be due on those...
NOT TRUE. Your comment assumes the OP simply buys ingredients, supplies, and equipment only from vendors located within the OP's taxing authority. Please re-read my answers to your questions to me on this same subject in a previous thread.It's not the best idea to make sweeping generalizations about potentially serious issues taxes. Especially when you are not an authority on the subject. There are very complex and little-known issues involved, such as interstate...
Glad to know we CAN screw over other bakers when it IS a wedding cake - thanks for clairifying! lol
New Posts  All Forums: