2018 organizer includes employee business, investment exp, etc. as Sch A deductions for client to complete. Anyone know how to eliminate just these from organizer?

[LindaSki]

Trying to complete organizer modifications so we can print early.  I don't want to send the misc. deductions on the organizer, make my clients fill it all in and then tell them none are deductible.  I've already informed them but if the organizer goes out the way it is now it's just going to create a big issue, lots of phone calls and explaining.  Help

[IRonMaN · Accepted solution]

But why would you want to cheat your clients out of a potential state deduction?  Most states didn’t adopt the federal changes 

15

[TaxGuyBill]

Are we really at that high of a count already?

[LindaSki]

I'm not asking about state tax deductions.  I want all state tax, property tax, mortgage interest, medical and charitable listed by my clients.  I just don't want them to have to gather investment advisor fees, tax prep costs, mileage for employee travel, etc. since it will be a lot of work for them and then I have to tell them we can't use it anyway.  So, I want all the schedule A info on my organizers, except I want to remove the misc. deduction section.  I can't see a way I can modify that part of the organizer myself.

[LindaSki]

Sorry, guess I should say.  I'm in Oregon.  They, of course, follow federal on this

[abctax55]

When printing organizers, go to the "settings" and suppress Schedule A.

edit...we were typing at the same time.  I don't think that is possible...you may have to manually pull that page.

[LindaSki]

Thanks everyone.  I think I'll just put a letter in.  The misc. deductions lists overlaps 2 pages, one I need, the other I don't.  I never gave consideration that other states were different.  Guess I better start getting my "individual tax return" mode brain going again.

[abctax55]

You're welcome...I'm in CA (which did NOT conform) so it's not an issue for me.  
The letter is a good idea, ass-u-ming your clients can/will read it

[TaxGuyBill]

I'm impressed the OP has clients that actually fill out the Organizer.   :smile:

[abctax55]

I *try* to make all of mine fill them out.  Some of them are so good at it that the organizers can be used to directly keypunch the data.  

[itonewbie]

Organizer is must for most moderate/complicated returns from a due d standpoint.  Interesting that Intuit does not see the need to have one for PTO and feels so strongly the general list of questions they have in Link would be more than sufficient that they made a decision for all the tax pros who use PTO that everyone should fall in line as they will NOT produce any tax organizer for PTO for 2018.

I am all for automating the tax preparation process.  Web-based tax organizers that can be customize with detailed questions based on client responses to a comprehensive questionnaire and feed directly into tax returns have been around for ages (preparing a return with automatic feed can sometimes feel like correcting a badly prepared return though).  These web-based organizers are often integrated with client portals that provide DMS and workflow functionalities.  Intuit Link is nowhere near that level of sophistication at this time but yet Intuit believes there is no longer a need for organizer because their study shows that only 10% of the tax pros' clients complete organizers.  The number of comments and Likes in the PTO FB group for making an organizer available, nevertheless, seem to say otherwise.

I don't have a stake in the paper organizer that Intuit decides not to produce as we develop our own electronic organizer that customizes itself for only questions relevant to each client but am just surprised how Intuit rationalizes their decision.  It would appear that Intuit does not understand the role of an organizer (whether in paper or electronic form) in the tax return preparation process and how Link, primarily as a client portal, and organizers do not need to be mutually exclusive (at least until Intuit is able to have Link truly function as an electronic tax organizer) but one should complement the other.  I also can't help but wonder why Intuit would think that PTO does not need an organizer when it is still being offered for both Lacerte and PS.  This is especially so when tax organizers are still a standard offering for practically all other professional tax products as far as I'm aware.  (See also https://competency.aicpa.org/media_resources/209714-tax-return-processes-the-intersection-of-due-dil... and https://www.thetaxadviser.com/issues/2010/oct/milford-oct2010.html)

Preparing a complete and accurate tax return involves much more than asking general questions like the following, which are extracted directly from Link.  And it takes more than having a 1099, K-1, or W-2 to report and compute the correct amount of taxable income.  Good luck if anyone relies on what is in Link to obtain the information required to prepare a return.  If Intuit expects tax pros to type in all the questions relevant to each client (customized or not) to augment or replace the general questions they populate, wouldn't that be counterproductive and inefficient?

* Did you donate money, household goods, cars or stock?
* Please list any questions or other concerns you might have.

Sorry for hijacking this post but thought these points are relevant since we're on the subject of tax organizer.

[abctax55]

Excellent hijack, Jensen and very articulate.

Even if I let a few clients (simple returns) skip the organizer, they MUST complete the questionnaire.  

And I modify/add to Lacerte's standard questionnaire every year, carrying forward my changes year to year.  

Even if the client doesn't complete the questionnaire, I use it in the interview/preparation/review process to verify that all information from the prior year is either included in the current year, or an explanation as to why it's not applicable for the current year is provided.

[IRonMaN]

I would automatically send organizers to all of my clients every year.  A number of them would never bring the organizer back to me when they dropped off their stuff or they would bring it back sealed in the envelope I mailed it in.  Last year I quit wasting paper and postage and only mailed the organizers to clients that actually returned them.  To be honest, some of the organizers that get completed I wish the client wouldn't fill in because they make such a mess out of them. Sometimes a blank organizer with last year's amounts are easier to work with over the "completed" organizers.

[itonewbie]

And that's why we use customizable electronic organizers so that it limits the amount of entries clients will be required to make to a minimum, that the entire process can be paperless from delivery to completion to upload, and that entries are restricted by validation (which, although does not solve all problems with clients making a mess of the input, does help preserve the integrity of the organizer).

There are definitely clients who may not return their organizers or return one with incomplete or messy information.  Depending on the amount of time involved to correspond with them for additional details, reconcile/compile/organize data, or deal with their shoe box return, we may then bill them for the time incurred as outlined in the engagement letter and we do forewarn them in advance.

But because Link is not an electronic organizer by design and the general questions are so poorly worded, tax pros who use PTO but have relied on organizers from Intuit would have no choice now but to source for an organizer somewhere else.  AICPA store does have some pretty comprehensive organizers available for different types of returns.  It is just disappointing, to say the least, that Intuit would take a decision that is so out of line with not only industry norm but their own offerings for Lacerte as well as PS in the name of progression.

[IRonMaN]

Are you practicing to write the sequel to War and Peace? :wink:

[itonewbie]

Obviously, I can find a publisher for my writing :joy:

[sjrcpa]

and readers

[itonewbie]

No readers either, sadly. :cry:

[itonewbie]

I actually meant I can't find a publisher... how typos or omissions can change the whole meaning :joy:

[sjrcpa]

Got it. I was thinking you meant you were being "published' here.

[IRonMaN]

"I actually meant I can't find a publisher... how typos or omissions can change the whole meaning"

Could be a reason why you are having trouble finding a publisher

[itonewbie]

:joy: