It is infuriating to see SO many articles, even from publications that can usually be trusted, referring to this legislation as "commendable" or "significant reform". It is far from it, and we can't expect the couch-dwellers to pay attention while the dying gasps of the 4th estate trumpet this kind of non-change.
As a law-talking-guy, I can say: this is really, really bad. It's really unusual to see such a split (4-1-4) in such an important decision, and it's tough to say for sure what the law actually is now. One thing that's clear: this doesn't bode well for American democracy UNLESS the legislature takes the clear signal the Court appears to be trying to send and crafts new law to fix the problems this decision creates.
This is just flatly bad advice. Entity selection and the decisions that come with it should be made very early in the process or it can have very negative unforeseen consequences down the road.
Education and clarity is important in any new business venture, especially one that involves multiple parties. If nothing else, a good buy-sell agreement is crucial in avoiding misunderstanding and back blood if one party wants out.
Liability protection is also hugely important. What startup doesn't need a bank account? Separation of entity an personal assets and liability is a big deal and should be meticulously maintained and documented from inception. This discipline is hard to pick up late in the game, and there's no reason for it.
Also, if your attorney is recommending a C corp as your best choice of entity, you either have a very unusual situation or a bad attorney.
Interesting article, Mr. Stross. I think it's great to see so many people hungry for the next new thing, out hustling and working hard to try to make it happen.
As awareness of startup culture grows, it is necessarily going to attract some goofiness. That's OK. Not every idea is a good one, and not every good idea is going to work. We need these stories to make the successes stand out so much brighter.
You may be right, but I hope you're not. I see things like Pebble's success on Kickstarter, Amanda Palmer bringing more attention to the idea of crowdsourcing funding for something that is every bit today's poetry, and see the spread of the paradigm shift we all already value (or else we wouldn't be here). I think it's right to be nervous, but I am cautiously optimistic that hacker/maker/startup culture is an attractive alternative to the existing production model.
I always appreciate your thoughts, but nowhere near as much as I would appreciate a new Laundry novel. Thanks for the good times.
I've read this same article every quarter for 5+ years now. In another 10 or 15 years, law schools may start to focus more on the importance of clinical education, but the change will continue to be slow.
The best and most valuable experiences I had in law school, bar none, were participating my school's clinic and volunteer income tax assistance site. I graduated in 2008, and still learn something new every day about how to be a good lawyer. If that doesn't continue for the rest of my career, it's my own damn fault.
I think this is a pretty significant step forward, and for me really highlights the changing relationship between Google and its users.
The transition from a passive search service requiring a user's input to an active provider fulfilling a variety of online needs is something that Google has clearly been working on from some time, and something they're good at. Still, the shift from "you might be interested in these shoes based on your search history" to "you might be interested in not having a computer infected with malware" seems pretty significant and bold to me. I really admire their vision and execution, but it still frightens me when I consider how much access I give Google to a large portion of my personal and professional life.
When Google becomes self-aware on August 29, 1997, I am really going to be screwed.
They hire folks with no education or experience, train them for a week, and turn them loose - generally paying $9/hr plus a percentage of fees they generate. The majority of their business comes from taking advantage of poor people - they prepare a return that takes me 6-9 minutes, offer a 'refund anticipation loan' that gets people instant gratification, and charge them $200-$400. Eff everything about that. I am thrilled to see the RAL on the way out and look for VITA sites to become much more heavily utilized soon!
as a tax attorney and someone with 4 years experience as a volunteer at an IRS VITA site, i am not sure that i'm entirely comfortable with the idea - but maybe i am missing something.
first of all, there are preparer regulations that require - well, lots of things. this system could run afoul of those quickly and easily.
secondly, the interview process is crucial for me. it can be driven by a form, but it's extremely important to talk with folks about what happened during the taxable year to identify not only potential pitfalls and ensure that everything gets the right treatment, but also to talk about planning opportunities that can save them big $$$ down the road.
for people that are foolish enough to go to H & R Block anyway, maybe this would be a valuable thing - but it's not a cookie-cutter process and treating it as such can result in serious fines and/or jail time for taxpayers and preparers.
my thoughts: make sure you find yourself a tax law badass to make sure you're doing things right. it will be complicated, and costly - but if you don't get it right out of the gate it's not even worth doing.
This article should be entitled, "Why failing to hire an attorney was my worst mistake." It's easy to think that some googling and reading statutes will get you where you need to be, but there are very real pitfalls and tax traps out there that attorneys are far better equipped to help you avoid.
If you're not serious enough about your new business to pay for professional advice - you're not serious enough to start it.
I've convinced myself I need a tablet because nothing really fills the "pdf viewer" slot in a good way. I can print pdfs of several state law-specific reference books for free (at cost of ink and paper ~2500 pages) or pay ~$400 for paper copies in 3-ring binders - or I can buy a wifi Xoom on Sunday. No-brainer.
I have a hard time focusing on pdfs on a desktop or laptop when distractions like reddit are so easily accessed - but if I can keep myself focused on the content at hand I can have a portable copy of important references with me at all times for a small price.
Burn it all and start over, I say :)