Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Tech Stock Options -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nancy who wrote (39690)	4/15/1998 9:09:00 AM
From: Tom Trader	Respond to of 58727

O/T -- Nancy, Dom, Jerry and Jay Thanks for your responses; given that all of you have given more or less the same response, I have decided to play it safe and include it in my 1997 income. Nancy--it was an excess distribution, but it resulted from a determination that in the year in question, the plan was discriminatory and therefore all contributions by every single employee--hundreds of employees-- was deemed to be an excess contribution. Don't ask me how something like that could have happened. I have never viewed the HR departments at most employers as anything to write home about and this is another demonstration of this, I guess. >>When dealing with the IRS it pays to be careful Well Jerry, I don't need any convincing of this. How is this for a really bizzare story, that probably compares with the stories that we heard tax-payers testify to before Congress. About 15 months ago, I was notified that because I had allegedly failed to file my 1993 tax return, the IRS had in effect done it for me and had determined that I owed them money. I hastened to send them a copy of the 93 return-- certified mail, etc-- and never heard any more for about six months. At that point I received a threatening notice and called them about it--and sent them another copy of the return. What is totally bizzare about this whole thing is that the original 93 return that I filed was the subject of an audit, during 1996--an audit that determined that I did not owe any additional money. In phone calls and correspondence with the IRS, I telling them that the return that I filed was audited--although they say that they never received it, and their computer shows that an audit, in fact, did occur but the issue has still not been resolved. In the meantime, they admit that the problem appears to be at their end and keep placing in abeyance any collection action. I know this sounds almost unbelievable--a non-filing determination when the return has actually been audited--but it is a true story!!