|
|
|
|
|
Posted by Elle on April 6, 2008, 4:26 pm
Please log in for more thread options
IRS Pub 1345, page 44 states: "The [E-file] provider must...
advise taxpayers that [Refund Anticipation Loans] are... not
a quicker way of receiving refunds from the IRS."
An H&R Block provided "HSBC Bank Application for a Refund
Anticipation Loan" states:
"4.(c) the IRS normally makes an electronic deposit in an
average of about 12 days after an electronic filing; (d)
HSBC tries to make proceeds of an instant RAL available on
the day of application."
How does H&R Block's wording not violate Pub. 1345's rules?
I see nothing else in the H&R Block paperwork indicating an
RAL is not a quicker way of obtaining one's refund.
--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >>
<< nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >>
<< that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >>
<< >>
<< The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >>
<< to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >>
<< are at www.asktax.org. >>
<< Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
|
|
Posted by Han on April 6, 2008, 6:22 pm
Please log in for more thread options
@newsfe17.phx:
> IRS Pub 1345, page 44 states: "The [E-file] provider must...
> advise taxpayers that [Refund Anticipation Loans] are... not
> a quicker way of receiving refunds from the IRS."
>
> An H&R Block provided "HSBC Bank Application for a Refund
> Anticipation Loan" states:
> "4.(c) the IRS normally makes an electronic deposit in an
> average of about 12 days after an electronic filing; (d)
> HSBC tries to make proceeds of an instant RAL available on
> the day of application."
>
> How does H&R Block's wording not violate Pub. 1345's rules?
>
> I see nothing else in the H&R Block paperwork indicating an
> RAL is not a quicker way of obtaining one's refund.
>
It is a question of English. "HSBC tries to make proceeds of an instant
RAL available ..." That means that a RAL is NOT a refund, but a "Refund
Anticipation Loan". Note: "proceeds", "anticipation" and "loan". Also
note the words "HSBC Bank Application for a Refund Anticipation Loan"
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >>
<< nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >>
<< that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >>
<< >>
<< The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >>
<< to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >>
<< are at www.asktax.org. >>
<< Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
|
|
Posted by GSalisbury on April 6, 2008, 7:00 pm
Please log in for more thread options
> @newsfe17.phx:
>
>> IRS Pub 1345, page 44 states: "The [E-file] provider must...
>> advise taxpayers that [Refund Anticipation Loans] are... not
>> a quicker way of receiving refunds from the IRS."
>>
>> An H&R Block provided "HSBC Bank Application for a Refund
>> Anticipation Loan" states:
>> "4.(c) the IRS normally makes an electronic deposit in an
>> average of about 12 days after an electronic filing; (d)
>> HSBC tries to make proceeds of an instant RAL available on
>> the day of application."
>>
>> How does H&R Block's wording not violate Pub. 1345's rules?
>>
>> I see nothing else in the H&R Block paperwork indicating an
>> RAL is not a quicker way of obtaining one's refund.
>>
> It is a question of English. "HSBC tries to make proceeds of an instant
> RAL available ..." That means that a RAL is NOT a refund, but a "Refund
> Anticipation Loan". Note: "proceeds", "anticipation" and "loan". Also
> note the words "HSBC Bank Application for a Refund Anticipation Loan"
>
> --
> Best regards
> Han
> email address is invalid
>
> --
And they also go on to say "...make proceeds of an instant RAL available on
the day of application.".
--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >>
<< nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >>
<< that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >>
<< >>
<< The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >>
<< to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >>
<< are at www.asktax.org. >>
<< Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
|
|
Posted by Mark Bole on April 6, 2008, 9:42 pm
Please log in for more thread options Elle wrote:
> IRS Pub 1345, page 44 states: "The [E-file] provider must...
> advise taxpayers that [Refund Anticipation Loans] are... not
> a quicker way of receiving refunds from the IRS."
>
> An H&R Block provided "HSBC Bank Application for a Refund
> Anticipation Loan" states:
A "provided" application? Certainly the taxpayer must have requested
it, they don't hand it out to everyone who walks through the door.
How do you know the advice required by the IRS wasn't provided prior to
receiving the requested application? As I recall, there is a client
service agreement that everyone signs, which most likely addresses this
issue. Do you really think a big ol' target like H&R is going to get
tripped up over something like this? Even when now-disgraced Elliot
Spitzer did his worst a few years back, most of his charges against
Block were thrown out in court.
-Mark Bole
--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >>
<< nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >>
<< that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >>
<< >>
<< The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >>
<< to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >>
<< are at www.asktax.org. >>
<< Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
|
|
Posted by Elle on April 6, 2008, 10:33 pm
Please log in for more thread options > Elle wrote:
>> IRS Pub 1345, page 44 states: "The [E-file] provider
>> must... advise taxpayers that [Refund Anticipation Loans]
>> are... not a quicker way of receiving refunds from the
>> IRS."
>>
>> An H&R Block provided "HSBC Bank Application for a Refund
>> Anticipation Loan" states:
>
> A "provided" application? Certainly the taxpayer must
> have requested it, they don't hand it out to everyone who
> walks through the door.
>
> How do you know the advice required by the IRS wasn't
> provided prior to receiving the requested application?
Even if it was, by my reading 4 (c) and (d) "undo" any such
advice.
> As I recall, there is a client service agreement that
> everyone signs, which most likely addresses this issue.
> Do you really think a big ol' target like H&R is going to
> get tripped up over something like this?
Yes. A quick overview from Wiki, under "RAL":
---
In 2002, H&R Block settled a lawsuit brought by the New York
City Department of Consumer Affairs for predatory lending
practices with regard to RALs and the EITC.
In 2003, the Illinois Attorney General issued a detailed
warning to taxpayers about such loans.
On February 15, 2006, the California Attorney General, Bill
Lockyer, sued H&R Block over its refund anticipation loan
business,[13] citing interest rates exceeded 500%, including
fees (which included the tax preparation fee, which is
unrelated to the RAL, but included per California law).
Lockyer said the company falsely portrayed the nature of the
loans, advertising "cash, cold, green, in your hand, out the
door."
In May 2005, a federal judge in Chicago rejected a $360
million settlement as inadequate.
---
Han, I think you misunderstood the meaning of the words I
had in [ ]. "RAL" is what was in the place of [Refund
Anticipation Loan] in the original text. Brackets are a
writing convention to indicate that the original text is not
being quoted perfectly exactly.
GSalisbury, I am pretty sure that is a distinction without a
difference.
--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >>
<< nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >>
<< that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >>
<< >>
<< The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >>
<< to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >>
<< are at www.asktax.org. >>
<< Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Re: H&R Block: How Does It Get Around Pub 1345, Page 44 Rules? | April 7, 2008, 4:19 pm |
| Voluntary page charges as deductible donations? | April 10, 2007, 10:25 am |
| HR Block woes! | March 27, 2007, 1:02 am |
| hr block problems - audit! | May 10, 2007, 11:35 pm |
| Gift Rules | January 18, 2007, 3:23 am |
| Expatriation rules | January 25, 2007, 2:24 am |
| LIFO Rules | March 23, 2007, 6:12 am |
| Rules of Attribution | February 13, 2008, 11:31 am |
| IRS "rules" on mileage reimbursements | June 8, 2007, 1:21 pm |
| Claiming dependent...Fed/State the same rules? | March 26, 2007, 10:57 am |
|
|
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap