I too have seen this, and although it presents a hard ship, they are well with in their right.
besides my CPA practice, I have a H&R type retail practice too at a separate location.
I have been seeing this practice for a few years in matters of various credits. Frequently they are right to not pay subject to verification.
What I can not comment on, and as I see as the crux of the matter, is how fast they react to our responses to their inquiry.
or has there been proper changes to the itemized deduction after their inquiry ?
Can anyone comment on that.?
-------------------------------------------
Abby Alhante
KURCIAS & ALHANTE, CPAs LLC
Woodbury NY
-------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 06-20-2014 00:38
From: Jeffrey Kraut
Subject: NYS Substituting Standard Deduction For Itemized Deductions On 2013 Returns
Steve,
I have seen two ways NYS has handled this: - They will not issue any refunds at all until the taxpayer has provided documentation supporting their itemized deductions.
- As you reported, they will convert the return to the standard deduction, and issue a revised refund.
- They will remove the particular deduction they are questioning (often real estate taxes and/or mortgage interest) and issue the revised refund.
Unfortunately, I have seen this far too often, and not infrequently. Typically this tends to happen more often in late March/early April so that the higher refund amount can be paid in the following fiscal year.
-------------------------------------------
Jeffrey B Kraut
CPA
Commack, NY 11725
jbkraut@att.net
-------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 06-19-2014 22:18
From: Steven Rosenberg
Subject: NYS Substituting Standard Deduction For Itemized Deductions On 2013 Returns
My office has had 2 instances where NYS reduced the itemized deductions claimed on the 2013 IT-201 to the standard deduction amount, thereby reducing the expected refund, and then asked for supporting documents for all itemized deductions.
This is inconsistent with past practices when refunds were paid as per the return filed, and if the return is selected for audit, THEN a request for the backup documentation is received. To my knowledge, never before has NYS paid a smaller refund than that reflected on a taxpayer's return while simultaneously asking for proof of the itemized deductions.
I know NYS has cash flow issues, but this policy seems very aggressive.
Has anyone else experienced this? Is this something NCCPAP should address in Albany?
-------------------------------------------
Steven Rosenberg
CPA
STEVEN T. ROSENBERG, CPA
Hauppauge NY
-------------------------------------------
Sent via Higher Logic Mobile