As featured in The Wall Street Journal, Money Magazine, and more!

Search: congress

This is a relatively long review of TurboTax 2012 Online, software for completing tax forms and submitting them to both the federal and state authorities. I’ve updated the review to reflect the changes to the software in 2012 (for filing 2011 tax returns).

Recently, the IRS began accepting federal tax returned filed electronically. Even before the IRS began accepting returns, you could still have completed your tax forms online through software. Programs like TurboTax, H&R Block, and Jackson Hewitt have been accepting customers and holding off on filing until now. This delay affected those who had itemized deductions, claimed the tuition and fees deduction, or claimed the sales tax deduction.

Many taxpayers are just getting started with their 2011 federal returns now. I’ve been using the services of an accountant for the past few years, and he was able to cut through the more confusing tax consequences of owning a business, saving me $15,000. Before my tax situation was complicated, however, I completed my taxes online using various software. Following a series of questions, completing and filing my 1040 form was easy.

Every year, the companies that provide tax e-filing services like TurboTax and H&R Block tweak their products, not only for the latest tax laws, but to improve features, making the process of tax filing easier. I took a look at TurboTax to see what changes the newest edition has to offer.

The first thing I noticed with TurboTax is the wide variety of products they have available. There is an option that is completely free for filing federal returns, but it is limited. This free version is for taxpayers whose returns can be completed using the 1040-EZ form, a simplified version of the 1040 form. If you have deductions, investments, a mortgage, or self-employment income, or if you want a step-by-step hand-holding guide to completing the forms, you will not be able to take advantage of the TurboTax Free Edition.

TurboTax offers several flavors in addition to the Free Edition, including Deluxe, Premier, Home & Business, and Business, each to handling more complicated tax situations above and beyond the lighter editions. The Deluxe Edition focuses on capturing all of your deductions. The Premier Edition does deductions, as well, but also includes the forms you need for investments like stocks, mutual funds, and rental properties. Home & Business covers all of the above as well as self-employment income, and the Business Edition is for anyone who is a partner in or owner of a corporation.

The editions are flexible; start with the Deluxe Edition, and as you come across features you need, TurboTax will ask if you’d like to upgrade — without charging you yet — to the edition that takes all of your needs into account. I started the Deluxe Edition to see how far I could go. I saw that for the most part none of the upgrades are needed if you are confident about your tax accounting abilities and are willing to enter your information directly into forms rather than have the software hold your hand through every decision.

Get your refund in as little as 8 days. E-file with TurboTax today. It’s Easy

Here is an overview of my entire process of completing my federal and state tax returns with TurboTax.

Read the full article →

{ 62 comments }

Although the home mortgage interest deduction is one of the most oft-cited benefits of owning a home, most taxpayers don’t take advantage of it because it requires itemizing taxes. If itemized deductions including mortgage interest paid throughout the year exceed the standard deduction, a taxpayer can take advantage of the benefit.

The benefit isn’t as great as it sounds. If you pay interest, it certainly does help to get a tax benefit, but it rarely tips the balance of the long-term financial effects of renting vs. buying a house. Don’t let the real estate industry sway your opinion about owning a house through this faulty rationale. And certainly don’t decide to take out a mortgage if you were intending to buy with cash. Since this is a deduction, your taxes are reduced by only a percentage of the interest you pay, related to your tax bracket.

The home mortgage interest deduction is currently endangered. The Obama administration and Congress are looking for ways to cut spending, and this tax deduction is on the table for consideration. Some estimated put the cost of this deduction at $100 billion each year.

Despite the cost and its overstated effects, the tax deduction has helped convince renters to become homeowners — at least among people I have spoken with. In other words, for the cost of $100 billion, the economy has seen the benefit of a growing real estate market for many years. This law has made the National Association of Realtors, a lobbying group for the real estate industry, very happy, and they are working hard to prevent the government from eliminating the tax deduction.

There are many rules that determine whether you can claim the interest you pay on your mortgage for a tax deduction. The rules help ensure that the benefit goes to home owners rather than “investors” who earn a living from flipping houses, though due to market conditions the past few years, that activity has been less of an issue.

The interest you pay for construction, purchasing or improving your primary or secondary home, whether through a mortgage, home equity loan, or home equity line of credit, qualifies. There are limitations, though. You can deduct interest paid on up to only $1,000,000 of home acquisition debt. For home equity debt, which is any loan that was taken not to construct, purchase, or improve a house, you can deduct interest paid on up to only $500,000 of this debt or the fair market value of the home, whichever is less. For taxpayers who are married, filing separately, each of these limits is reduced by half.

Normally, the total of all of your itemized deductions are limited by income, but that income limitation was lifted in 2010. It could be lifted again if the benefit is not eliminated.

Question for homeowners: Do you take the home mortgage interest deduction? Question for everyone: Should this deduction be eliminated for the sake of reducing the national budget deficit?

Photo: Wonderlane

{ 60 comments }

As many Presidents of the United States have done, President Obama avoided confrontation with Congress by appointing an individual to direct a government organization while lawmakers were on recess. Yesterday, the President appointed former Ohio attorney general Richard Cordray to the long-delayed position of director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). Now that this department has a director, it can move forward in enacting regulations — not just suggestions — for non-bank financial entities.

Lately, the CFPB has been working on simplifying customer agreements for financial accounts. A great example is this redesigned credit card agreements. The new design highlights the important terms of the agreement, describes financial terms in plain language, and helps consumers increase awareness of their obligations and rights. The bureau is currently working on a similar resigned agreement for mortgage contracts.

Richard CordrayWithout a director, none of these recommendations would be required to be enacted by financial firms. Some banks have already taken steps to improve communication, but banks are also regulated by the Federal Reserve. The Fed issued some regulations as part of the Credit CARD Act of 2009, but the regulations do not extend to non-bank financial firms.

The CFPB may face legal challenges from industry groups who insist that the bureau can have no power to issue regulations.

Who is Richard Cordray?

When Richard Cordray was the attorney general in Ohio, and when he was Ohio’s treasurer before assuming the role of attorney general, I would receive marketing emails from him every couple of months. He championed pro-consumer causes and worked to ensure the public had a better understanding of predatory financial arrangements. His emails were directed at the press to help raise issues in the media. For example, he campaigned for closing loopholes that allows payday lenders to practice predatory tactics and he warned consumers of scams related to the Cash for Clunkers program. Cordray lost in his campaign to be re-elected attorney general in Ohio.

Cordray wasn’t without enemies in the banking industry. He filed a lawsuit against Bank of America and its executives in 2009 on behalf of Ohio’s state pension funds related to the acquisition of Merrill Lynch.

Cordray is also a five-time champion on Jeopardy.

In general, judging by his past actions, Cordray appears to be comfortable with a position strongly in opposition with Wall Street interests, which is a change in direction for Washington politicians for as long as I’ve been an adult. Clinton, Bush II, and Obama have all, despite occasional moments of pro-consumer rhetoric, appointed Wall Street insiders to major financial roles in government and pseudo-government agencies.

There is some validity to that philosophy, after all, Wall Street executives have the connections and relationships with other Wall Street executives, and these connections are necessary for the government to operate efficiently with one of the largest driving forces of the American and global economy. The government, however, can’t be expected to issue effective regulations if it needs to stay on Wall Street’s “good side,” however.

It’s a tough balance to manage, and it’s one of the many reasons why I avoid politics.

Photo: Richard Cordray

{ 14 comments }

If you enter into an agreement with a company, and that company does something to wrong you, most of the time you can avail yourself of the American judicial system to correct the problem. This happens frequently, with both individual lawsuits and class action lawsuits. For example, Bank of America is dealing with several lawsuits stemming from shady fee practices and other policies enacted by Countrywide Financial, a company Bank of America acquired.

In order for bank to protect themselves from problems and major expenses like these is to take away their customers’ rights to a trial with a jury or a judge. This is legal, and you don’t even need to sign these rights away. Companies can change these terms of your banking agreement, and your continued patronage implies that you agree and are willing to waive your rights for the benefit of remaining a customer.

Wells FargoI make it a point to thumb through the mailed statements because banks will occasionally update terms and change fees, and it’s easy to miss this information if I were to only check my account online or in my Quicken software. A few days ago, I received my statement from Wells Fargo in the mail, and discovered a notice informing me that by remaining a customer at Wells Fargo beyond February 15, 2012, I would never be able to be included in a class action lawsuit or sue the bank myself. Any disputes would go through a binding arbitration process.

Binding arbitration has its benefits. It is often less costly, and businesses can generally get a sense for the result before moving forward. The benefits, plainly one-sided, end there.

Binding arbitration is usually detrimental to consumers. The costs for an individual often outweigh the potential reward, and potential rewards are low because binding arbitration often favors the large company over the individual, unlike juries and most judges. It’s easy to see why arbitrators favor big businesses; arbitration is a business, and if they favor a large corporation, that corporation will likely bring more business to the arbitrator.

A consumer initiating arbitration through the American Arbitration Association, the administer Wells Fargo identifies in its new terms, would be subject to fees, such as:

  • $250 for telephone consultation if the claim is less than $75,000, higher otherwise
  • $750 for in-person consultation of the claim is less than $75,000, higher otherwise
  • Up to $125 in additional fees if the claim is less than $10,000, up to $375 if the claim is less than $75,000, higher otherwise

The business would be subject to fees higher than those listed above for the consumer, but the total expense for a corporation could still be considerably less than dealing with a lawsuit. Not every arbitration organization follows the same pattern for fees, though. In some cases, the consumer could spend more money initiating arbitration than filing his or her own suit.

Also a detriment to the consumer, arbitrators are not required to follow an established process. This uncertainty can limit the consumer’s ability to argue. For example, arbitration does not include a discovery process, making it difficult for consumers to present evidence to support their cases. Also, the consumer does not have the ability to choose the arbitrator. The business selects the arbitrator, so it’s clear that this could easily be a biased approach to settling a disagreement.

Binding arbitration is reviled so much that Congress has been inspired to take action to determine whether binding arbitration clauses can be considered legal — in cellular phone contracts, only. So far, this effort has failed to produce any results beneficial for the consumer.

Bank of America and other banks have been the subject of a class action lawsuit alleging they have forced customers into mandatory binding arbitration agreements. The Supreme Court has ruled 5 to 4 in favor of companies’ options to put binding arbitration into customer agreements.

What a consumer can do about binding arbitration clauses

I’ve been a customer of Wells Fargo or its predecessors for most of my life. I’ve had my primary checking and savings accounts at this bank. But with this change, I am not wasting any more time in moving my money out of this bank. It’s not that I anticipate having any problems that require a lawsuit or arbitration, and if I am included in any class action lawsuit, I don’t expect to gain much.

Businesses and employers force binding arbitration on customers when the customers or employees are in a weaker position than the larger entity. For example, with unemployment high, many Americans feel lucky to have jobs. They’re willing to waive rights in order to be employed, and most do. Most customers will be unaware that by continuing to hold their accounts they waive their rights. Others will be aware and not consider this to be an issue worthy of going through the process of closing their accounts. Very few will use this as an incentive to move money elsewhere.

Banking institutions are everywhere, however, and customers have choices. For example, I could move all of my money held at Wells Fargo to Chase Bank. At one point, Chase included binding arbitration in its customer contracts for credit cards but has recently abandoned this approach. There is always a danger that the terms will change, particularly as more big banks want to protect the revenue they earn from fees. With a Chase branch within walking distance to me, this move makes sense, but it still isn’t a perfect solution.

I would prefer to switch to a credit union, but I’ve researched my options many times, and there are no credit unions convenient for me. Additionally, one of the largest and most popular credit unions, USAA, is as bad as Wells Fargo when it comes to members’ rights: USAA requires customers to waive their rights to a trial by judge or jury, just like the bank I intend to leave.

I’ll be moving my money out of this bank as soon as possible.

If you decide to move your business to a company that does not limit your rights, be sure to let the company know exactly why it is lowing your business. Unfair fee practices and binding arbitration could be only two of many reasons you’d be better off being a customer elsewhere.

Read the entire Wells Fargo notice below. Read the full article →

{ 32 comments }

The CFPB’s New Credit Card Agreements

by Flexo

Although Congress is dragging its feet in confirming the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s potential director, the bureau has been busy developing new tools to help consumers understand agreements that are potentially damaging to a family’s finances. Last year, issuers debuted new credit card statements designed to frighten borrowers into paying off debt faster. The new ... Continue reading this article…

3 comments Read the full article →

Tax Deduction for Time Spent Volunteering

by Flexo
Volunteer

I recently received reader feedback from a conscious saver who is planning to move his money from Wells Fargo to a credit union. She won’t make the Bank Transfer Day November 5 goal, because the credit union’s branch is planned to open November 7. This reader plans to be one of the new branch’s first ... Continue reading this article…

4 comments Read the full article →

Obama’s Student Loan Plan

by Flexo
Graduation

By executive order, President Obama has made a few minor changes to the student loan industry designed to help students and former students with unmanageable student loan debt. Anyone who began their undergraduate studies in 2006 probably did so with the reasonable assumption that they’d have a job after graduation. By the time these students ... Continue reading this article…

9 comments Read the full article →

The Buffett Rule: Tax for Millionaires

by Flexo
Warren Buffett

As a continuation of President Obama’s jobs proposal (economic stimulus) for curbing spending and increasing federal government revenue, the administration is taking a cue from famous investor, Warren Buffett. On many occasions, Buffett has claimed that wealthy Americans do not pay a fair share of the tax burden relative to their means to do so. ... Continue reading this article…

38 comments Read the full article →
Page 1 of 1812345···Last »