state of Illinois "corrects" my tax return

[zinfamous]

so I moved from IL to CA in 2008. I claimed moving expenses on my IL tax return. (I moved in July-August, started working in CA first of December--was actually paid only in 2009, so have no 2009 CA taxes--only IL).

The state "corrected" my return on their own whim, claiming I was not a resident (no way in hell they actually took the time to look into it), so I've had to deal with Chicago management companies and get old copies of leases (threw these out only a month or so ago as I recently moved within town).

I'm wondering if the playful, slightly condescending attitude will go over well with the DoR. I'm actually having fun with this, b/c it's quite preposterous that they make these assumption. (i don't know, is there some tax law saying that I can't claim the state I'm moving from? technically, I was in no way a resident of CA, can not pay CA taxes in 2008, and have no record of employment in CA for 2008--as taxes go).

Should I be more professional? Do the types in these offices actually have a sense of humor and would they get a kick out of it?

Enclosed you will find the Return Correction Notice regarding changes applied to my 2008 IL-1040 Tax Return.

The state claims that I am unable to claim moving expenses as a partial resident of the state of Illinois for the year 2008 when the move occurred. I find this claim preposterous, considering that the state would have no basis to make this claim other than pure assumption.

Enclosed you will also find a lease of residence showing my tenancy in Chicago from October 2007 to October 2008. I moved out of state in July/August 2008. Further, you will find enclosed an invoice for payment made to United Van Lines (2 pages), via Hollander International (pg 2; 1801 Pratt Blvd, Elk Grove Villa, IL, 60007-5904) in the amount of $3225.06 and dated August 11, 2008. Further, you may notice that the address of delivery is 601 Cedar St, Berkeley, CA, 94791. Upon examining the third enclosed document, it may interest you to discover that the address of delivery is a storage facility, Extra Space Storage. I claim that this is neither a valid residence, and as such represents no grounds for claiming residency within any state.

Based on these insurmountable facts:

-Residency established within Chicago, IL until September, 2008.
-Personal items delivered out of state July-August, 2008. (paid moving expenses)
-The arrival of said personal items at a California storage facility (non-legal residence)
-The use of an Illinois business to provide the moving service (thus having paid Illinois
taxes for this service)
-The curious fact that the months of July and August appear prior to the months of
September and August on the Gregorian calendar. Does the IL Dept of Revenue
use a Mayan calender, by chance?

It is hardly reasonable for the state to claim that I was not a resident of the state of Illinois when these moving expenses occurred.

I trust that the evidence provided will certainly convince the Dept of Revenue that their corrections were indeed erroneous and un-founded (having given me no initial explanation of why the state believed I was not a resident when I moved, thus inspiring the correction on my carefully-prepared tax return).

Am I out of line here? Will this be win or fail? (please vote based on nature of letter, not on length of OP.

:beer:

 

[Adul]

good luck

 

[SSSnail]

The Feds "corrected" my returns too, and it almost gave me a heart attack. It turns out that I would owe 12K in taxes, but due to my "guy" tax repairing prowess, he got the Feds to refund to me ~$500, that's on files.

A few weeks go by, and I received a letter from the IRS... I'm thinking "Oh shiat", turns out it was some simple claim that they took off, they still sent me $48. Yay!

*Breath deeply*

Sorry, I don't know anything about your situations.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

Please tell me you're joking? The IRS lack of humor is known through out the Galaxy! You do NOT want a IRS Special Investigator to take a "personal" interest in your case. Just present the bare facts and evidence while apologizing for not doing it sooner.

 

[Damn Dirty Ape]

Originally posted by: zinfamous
so I moved from IL to CA in 2008. I claimed moving expenses on my IL tax return. (I moved in July-August, started working in CA first of December--was actually paid only in 2009, so have no 2009 CA taxes--only IL).

The state "corrected" my return on their own whim, claiming I was not a resident (no way in hell they actually took the time to look into it), so I've had to deal with Chicago management companies and get old copies of leases (threw these out only a month or so ago as I recently moved within town).

I'm wondering if the playful, slightly condescending attitude will go over well with the DoR. I'm actually having fun with this, b/c it's quite preposterous that they make these assumption. (i don't know, is there some tax law saying that I can't claim the state I'm moving from? technically, I was in no way a resident of CA, can not pay CA taxes in 2008, and have no record of employment in CA for 2008--as taxes go).

Should I be more professional? Do the types in these offices actually have a sense of humor and would they get a kick out of it?

Enclosed you will find the Return Correction Notice regarding changes applied to my 2008 IL-1040 Tax Return.

The state claims that I am unable to claim moving expenses as a partial resident of the state of Illinois for the year 2008 when the move occurred. I find this claim preposterous, considering that the state would have no basis to make this claim other than pure assumption.

Enclosed you will also find a lease of residence showing my tenancy in Chicago from October 2007 to October 2008. I moved out of state in July/August 2008. Further, you will find enclosed an invoice for payment made to United Van Lines (2 pages), via Hollander International (pg 2; 1801 Pratt Blvd, Elk Grove Villa, IL, 60007-5904) in the amount of $3225.06 and dated August 11, 2008. Further, you may notice that the address of delivery is 601 Cedar St, Berkeley, CA, 94791. Upon examining the third enclosed document, it may interest you to discover that the address of delivery is a storage facility, Extra Space Storage. I claim that this is neither a valid residence, and as such represents no grounds for claiming residency within any state.

Based on these insurmountable facts:

-Residency established within Chicago, IL until September, 2008.
-Personal items delivered out of state July-August, 2008. (paid moving expenses)
-The arrival of said personal items at a California storage facility (non-legal residence)
-The use of an Illinois business to provide the moving service (thus having paid Illinois
taxes for this service)
-The curious fact that the months of July and August appear prior to the months of
September and August on the Gregorian calendar. Does the IL Dept of Revenue
use a Mayan calender, by chance?

It is hardly reasonable for the state to claim that I was not a resident of the state of Illinois when these moving expenses occurred.

I trust that the evidence provided will certainly convince the Dept of Revenue that their corrections were indeed erroneous and un-founded (having given me no initial explanation of why the state believed I was not a resident when I moved, thus inspiring the correction on my carefully-prepared tax return).

Am I out of line here? Will this be win or fail? (please vote based on nature of letter, not on length of OP.

:beer:

that will go over just fine.. :laugh:

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: SSSnail
The Feds "corrected" my returns too, and it almost gave me a heart attack. It turns out that I would owe 12K in taxes, but due to my "guy" tax repairing prowess, he got the Feds to refund to me ~$500, that's on files.

A few weeks go by, and I received a letter from the IRS... I'm thinking "Oh shiat", turns out it was some simple claim that they took off, they still sent me $48. Yay!

*Breath deeply*

Sorry, I don't know anything about your situations.

yeah, IL did this to me before, but it was only a $12 issue and no extraneous circumstance.

My main issue here is that this is a state record of my move, which I of course claimed on my Fed 1040.

...If I have no state to claim this for (sure as shit can't claim for CA), then will this come back to bite me in the ass? I have to claim IL, b/c it's a record, right?

and all the proof is there that I was a Chicago resident after the move. hell, the only evidence (a good bit of it, I'd say), is that my stuff moved--not me.

I'm actually going to take out the "I moved" language to remain more consistent with my documents and my argument as a whole.

 

[KillerCharlie]

If you really want them to side with you, sounding like an ass is not the way to do it. Apparently you haven't learned much in life.

 

[Steve]

Originally posted by: zinfamous
so I moved from IL to CA in 2008. I claimed moving expenses on my IL tax return. (I moved in July-August, started working in CA first of December--was actually paid only in 2009, so have no 2008 CA taxes--only IL).

The state "corrected" my return on their own whim, claiming I was not a resident (no way in hell they actually took the time to look into it), so I've had to deal with Chicago management companies and get old copies of leases (threw these out only a month or so ago as I recently moved within town).

I'm wondering if the playful, slightly condescending attitude will go over well with the DoR. I'm actually having fun with this, b/c it's quite preposterous that they make these assumption. (i don't know, is there some tax law saying that I can't claim the state I'm moving from? technically, I was in no way a resident of CA, can not pay CA taxes in 2008, and have no record of employment in CA for 2008--as taxes go).

Should I be more professional? Do the types in these offices actually have a sense of humor and would they get a kick out of it?

Enclosed you will find the Return Correction Notice regarding changes applied to my 2008 IL-1040 Tax Return.

The state claims that I am unable to claim moving expenses as a partial resident of the state of Illinois for the year 2008 when the move occurred. I find this claim preposterous, considering that the state would have no basis to make this claim other than pure assumption.

Enclosed you will also find a lease of residence showing my tenancy in Chicago from October 2007 to October 2008. I moved out of state in July/August 2008. Further, you will find enclosed an invoice for payment made to United Van Lines (2 pages), via Hollander International (pg 2; 1801 Pratt Blvd, Elk Grove Villa, IL, 60007-5904) in the amount of $3225.06 and dated August 11, 2008. Further, you may notice that the address of delivery is 601 Cedar St, Berkeley, CA, 94791. Upon examining the third enclosed document, it may interest you to discover that the address of delivery is a storage facility, Extra Space Storage. I claim that this is neither a valid residence, and as such represents no grounds for claiming residency within any state.

Based on these insurmountable facts:

-Residency established within Chicago, IL until September, 2008.
-Personal items delivered out of state July-August, 2008. (paid moving expenses)
-The arrival of said personal items at a California storage facility (non-legal residence)
-The use of an Illinois business to provide the moving service (thus having paid Illinois
taxes for this service)
-The curious fact that the months of July and August appear prior to the months of
September and October on the Gregorian calendar. Does the IL Dept of Revenue use a Mayan calendar, by chance?

It is hardly reasonable for the state to claim that I was not a resident of the state of Illinois when these moving expenses occurred.

I trust that the evidence provided will certainly convince the Dept of Revenue that their corrections were indeed erroneous and un-founded (having given me no initial explanation of why the state believed I was not a resident when I moved, thus inspiring the correction on my carefully-prepared tax return).

Am I out of line here? Will this be win or fail? (please vote based on nature of letter, not on length of OP.

:beer:

Corrections in bold

I like it, but it won't make anyone at those offices smile. My best advice is to try and get a free consultation with any accountant/tax prep/tax attorney/etc. in the state of CA, they may be able to tell you why you're wrong (in the case you are for some unknown, esoteric tax law) or else direct you in how to get this properly fixed.

That said, if you do decide to send this document, include pictures.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: MagnusTheBrewer
Please tell me you're joking? The IRS lack of humor is known through out the Galaxy! You do NOT want a IRS Special Investigator to take a "personal" interest in your case. Just present the bare facts and evidence while apologizing for not doing it sooner.

I'm well aware of that, but this is the IL Dept of Revenue. Are the staties as bad as the Feds? that's what I'm getting at here....

I know 98% of those in IL "government" are crooks, but I'm hoping they have some sense of...humor? It's rather clear to me that they didn't even review my return; just saw a chance to revoke my refund based on an imaginary technicality. They've tried this before, for much less money...

I honestly wonder why they continue to do this. Why the hell do I have to fill out my taxes if they're so keen to do it themselves? I bit this has 100% relevance to paying for the Blagojavic investigation & trial.

stay classy, Illinois.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: Steve

Corrections in bold

I like it, but it won't make anyone at those offices smile. My best advice is to try and get a free consultation with any accountant/tax prep/tax attorney/etc. in the state of CA, they may be able to tell you why you're wrong (in the case you are for some unknown, esoteric tax law) or else direct you in how to get this properly fixed.

That said, if you do decide to send this document, include pictures.

nipples?

 

[KLin]

Please leave out the sarcastic comments. They don't benefit your argument.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: KillerCharlie
If you really want them to side with you, sounding like an ass is not the way to do it. Apparently you haven't learned much in life.

Well, I don't mean to sound like an ass, just sarcastically humorous. Though my GF says it sounds asshole-ish, so there is indeed some editing to be done ("preposterous" bit in the intro is getting tossed for sure)

Actually, though, I've been forced to be a major asshole to Comcast several times in the past. It ended up getting my digital package + broadband for ~ $20 month. So it does get you somewhere, sometimes.

By the way, I resent your "sounding like an ass" 2nd sentence.

 

[IronWing]

Kentucky used to send hate mail just about every year stating that I had miscalculated the tax owned and that I was in for a hoggin'. The nastygram was always accompanied by a one to two dollar refund check. The KY forms had look up tables like the federal forms for finding the tax owned but the KY Revenue Cabinet used the underlying formula instead of the table so for say 99.9% of taxpayers, the tax owned from the the table failed to match the calculated tax.

 

[DaveSimmons]

I suspect that anyone voting "WIN" is enjoying the thought of you being raked over the coals by a state worker who is unamused by your sarcasm.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
I suspect that anyone voting "WIN" is enjoying the thought of you being raked over the coals by a state worker who is unamused by your sarcasm.

hmmmm, this is my view as well.

And I have yet to vote.



I'm waiting to sober up tomorrow morning, do the necessary edits, and send her out all proper.


The only thing that I wish to keep is the sequence of months and mention of the Gregorian calender. I mean, that is nothing but factual. Once I toss out the comment on the Mayan calender (which was last minute just before posting, actually), it really isn't that asshole-ish, no? I've worked with Jehovah's witnesses in the office--they cowtow you to work to whatever non-pagan, deceitfully anti-Christian holiday they reject, and so in my mind it seems necessary to clarify that my evidence is based off of a Gregorian time chart.

Why should I assume the state operates in the same way I or the rest of us work?

 

[Platypus]

I'd just present facts and leave it be... although I'd love for you to end up back in Chicago, just not in some secret Daley prison facility

 

[nerp]

If you drop the holier-than-thou snarkiness and actually use polite business correspondence, you might stand a better chance.

 

[Miramonti]

For the second year in a row my state told me I filed incorrectly...and I have overpaid.

 

[mugs]

Edit: I'm re-reading your post and I'm trying to figure out what exactly their reason was for denying the deduction. What are the rules for deducting the moving expenses?

 

[KeithTalent]

Yeah I have a feeling you would be better off removing any sarcasm or snarkiness from your letter. The problem with written correspondence to a Government agency like that is you never know who is going to be reading it on the other end, so they may have no sense of humour at all, and you also don't know how well the written sarcasm will be interpreted, even if the person actually has a decent sense of humour.

Whenever I deal wih CRA (Canadian IRS) via written correspondence, I try to remain as professional as possible. When I talk with them on the phone, or in person, it can be completely different, because at least you can feel the person out and determine how to approach them from that. When you cannot interact with the person, it is better, in my opinion, to play it safe and leave that kind of thing out.

Sorry, that was kind of an annoying, rambling post. Anyway, good luck zin! :beer:

KT

 

[waffleironhead]

At what point did you change your drivers license to CA, if ever? That is when you may have officially changed state of residence. Did you file a 1040 or a NR return? NR is what you should have gone with as you were a part year resident.

 

[FelixDeCat]

I couldnt imagine what its like to have to mess with any state income tax return. :thumbsdown:

 

[sao123]

Originally posted by: waffleironhead
At what point did you change your drivers license to CA, if ever? That is when you may have officially changed state of residence. Did you file a 1040 or a NR return? NR is what you should have gone with as you were a part year resident.

this.

 

[BoomerD]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: MagnusTheBrewer
Please tell me you're joking? The IRS lack of humor is known through out the Galaxy! You do NOT want a IRS Special Investigator to take a "personal" interest in your case. Just present the bare facts and evidence while apologizing for not doing it sooner.

I'm well aware of that, but this is the IL Dept of Revenue. Are the staties as bad as the Feds? that's what I'm getting at here....

I know 98% of those in IL "government" are crooks, but I'm hoping they have some sense of...humor? It's rather clear to me that they didn't even review my return; just saw a chance to revoke my refund based on an imaginary technicality. They've tried this before, for much less money...

I honestly wonder why they continue to do this. Why the hell do I have to fill out my taxes if they're so keen to do it themselves? I bit this has 100% relevance to paying for the Blagojavic investigation & trial.

stay classy, Illinois.

I've never had to deal with the tax folks in Illinois, but in my experience with the tax people in several other states, they usually have even less of a sense of humor than the IRS.

While every state is different, I've never seen one that allows you to deduct moving expenses OUT of the state. SOME will let you take a deduction for moving INTO the state, but even that's iffy.

Your best bet is to find someone who's familiar with Illinois tax law. I'm sure that will be easy in Berzerkely...probably on every corner...
BUT, a good CPA should have access to the information.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: BoomerD
While every state is different, I've never seen one that allows you to deduct moving expenses OUT of the state. SOME will let you take a deduction for moving INTO the state, but even that's iffy.

I googled and found that Illinois allows you to deduct moving expenses for moving out of state as long as the expenses were paid while you still lived in Illinois. http://www.revenue.state.il.us...l/IL-1040-NR-Instr.pdf (page 8)

He has the receipts showing that he moved in July and August, so I guess he just needs to provide proof that he lived in Illinois after he paid the movers.