Guest ppapdx Posted March 20, 2013 Posted March 20, 2013 It was originally distributed prior to 3/15, but it had to be re-issued after 3/15 due to it being lost. I assume a conservative approach is to pay the excise tax, since the date of the check is after 3/15. Though I'm sure an argument can be made if there is proof that an original distribution was made prior to 3/15. Does anyone know if the IRS has issued any informal guidance in terms of how an auditor would treat this situation?
BG5150 Posted March 20, 2013 Posted March 20, 2013 I would say just reissue the check and move on if there is ample evidence the funds were sold prior to March 15. I look at it this way: what if someone took a distribution on December 27, 2012 check issued December 28, 2012. The 1099 will say 2012. If the check gets lost and not reissued until February, the 1099 will still say 2012 even though the check that eventually gets cashed is dated and executed in 2013. Bill Presson 1 QKA, QPA, CPC, ERPATwo wrongs don't make a right, but three rights make a left.
Bird Posted March 21, 2013 Posted March 21, 2013 I agree; just reissue. Revising reporting just because someone lost (or intentionally didn't cash) a check is...well, it's not good. Ed Snyder
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now