Charlotte Attorney's Informative Blog

Scheduling an appointment at Maxwell Law Firm

You may schedule an appointment by calling our office at 704-461-1883 or by doing so online by clicking here.  You save 25% off your consultation by booking online.

ATTORNEY FEES AND PAYMENT

Under normal circumstances, the Firm charges a fee for all consultations, except traffic. All consultation fees are due at the time of service, prior to the appointment.  Please note that the fee paid for Bankruptcy Appointments, is used to pull your credit report. We accept several forms of payment, including cash, check and credit card (VISA, Master Card, AmEx, Discover, and paypal (if paid in advance). The Client will receive a confirmation email after scheduling the appointment and a questionnaire will be emailed to the client based on their particular issue, prior to their scheduled consultation. The completed questionnaire may be e-mailed or faxed to us at least one hour prior to the appointment so the potential client will get the most out of his or her time. The potential client may also bring the completed questionnaire to the office on the day of the appointment. In that event, we ask that the potential client arrive at least ten minutes early so that the attorney can review the individual’s information in preparation for the meeting. We also ask that the potential client bring to the appointment any pay stubs, contracts, agreements, company handbooks, and/or other significant documents related to the case.

TYPES OF APPOINTMENTS AVAILABLE

This firm offers services for Chapter 7 Bankruptcy, Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, Debt Defense,  Tax Debt Defense, Small Business, and Uncontested Divorces legal services. Note No consultation is necessary for traffic defense services, please see our  traffic evaluation form  for your free traffic ticket evaluation.

LEGAL REPRESENTATION

An individual becomes a client upon the Firm’s receipt of the signed representation agreement and payment of any applicable legal fees pursuant to the agreement.

ATTORNEY’S AVAILABILITY

The attorneys avoid interruptions while working on client matters. As a result, they typically take phone calls and visits by appointment only. If you become a client, the attorneys normally return phone messages and emails in order of urgency. Please be assured that the attorneys or their assistants will return your message at his/her earliest opportunity. PLEASE NOTE THAT WE ALSO PROVIDE TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS FOR THE CONVENIENCE OF CLIENTS WHO ARE UNABLE TO COME INTO THE OFFICE.

CANCELLATIONS/RESCHEDULING

We ask that potential clients provide us with at least twenty (24) hour notice of a cancellation or request to schedule an appointment, in order to avoid cancellation fees. ALL INDIVIDUALS WHO FAIL TO CALL OR EMAIL WITHIN TWENTY FOUR (24) HOURS BEFORE THEIR SCHEDULED APPOINTMENT SHALL BE CHARGED A CANCELLATION FEE.  If you need to reschedule or cancel an appointment please call or email our office before the time listed above and do so. We will send you a confirmation email showing that your appointment has been canceled or rescheduled.

Tweet This Post

At Tax Resolution Services, we all agree that tax evasion is never a good idea.  People who pull tax scams, such as filing false tax returns, may feel like they are lining their pockets with money at the moment, but the money does no good once they are in prison.  Tax cheats usually end up in prison and with a hefty fine to boot, as in the example below.

The manager of a Warrensburg, Mo., restaurant has pleaded guilty to a role in a conspiracy to file false tax returns.

Javier Posada, 43, of Warrensburg, a naturalized U.S. citizen from Mexico, admitted that he participated in a conspiracy to under report income received at several El Vaquero restaurants in Missouri from June 2002 to August 2008.

Conspirators removed cash from the register or directed others to remove cash from the register, and the restaurants failed to report the receipt of that cash for tax purposes. They also created fraudulent sales ledgers and destroyed guest tickets.

Under the terms of the plea agreement, Posada must pay $382,296 in restitution to the IRS. He also faces up to five years in prison.

Related posts:

1. Two Tax Rules: Avoid Tax Scams and If You Need Tax Relief Consult a Tax Professional

Tweet This Post

Tweet This Post

It never hurts to be prepared. That's the thinking of freshman Rep. Daniel Webster.

The Florida Republican has introduced the Prioritize Spending Act of 2011 (H.R. 2402) to, he says, "ensure America's priorities are preserved in the event that the debt ceiling is reached."

"It is important that while we fight for true spending transformations," said Webster in announcing the bill, "we also prepare to prevent any default by protecting our priorities."

So just what does Webster think should be paid with the actual dollars Uncle Sam will have on hand if there's no debt ceiling deal?

First, the U.S. should prevent default by making the country's debt payments.

Then we should continue to pay military salaries and benefits in "such amounts as the President certifies to the Congress are necessary to carry out vital national security priorities."

Finally, Webster would spend what we have left on providing Social Security and Medicare benefits.

Some cash left over: Actually, says Webster, after meeting these suggested obligations, the Treasury should have around $30 billion left over each month.

The decision on what else would be paid, he said, would remain with the executive branch.

Webster emphasizes that his proposal is purely a stopgap spending plan if worse comes to worst in a few weeks.

"This bill is intended to be a short-term measure to require the Treasury to pay the specified accounts until a debt reduction plan can be initiated," he said in a fact sheet released in connection with the bill's introduction.

Picking priorities: So how did he come up with the spending priorities?

"The purpose in prioritizing public debt repayment is to keep the United States from entering a period of default on its existing loans," said Webster.

As for the military and senior citizens, Webster said "it is irresponsible to allow a situation to develop where our military and seniors, two groups of citizens that rely on Washington to fulfill its promises, may be forced to go without the programs that provide for their basic needs."

The bill is pending in the Ways and Means Committee. Cosponsors, all Republicans, are Rep Richard Nugent, Bill Posey and Dennis Ross, all of Florida; Michael Turner of Ohio; and Joe Wilson of South Carolina.

Do you agree with the Representatives' choices on spending our potentially limited federal funds? What do you want from government? What would you pay for, first and last?

History of the debt ceiling: While we are all waiting for resolution of the current U.S. fiscal situation, it's perversely reassuring to realize that this isn't anything new.

Glenn Kessler, The Fact Checker for the Washington Post, explains the debt ceiling debate, providing some perspective, history and evaluation of recent rantings about what's happening or not happening.

Related posts:

• What's wrong with the Democrats when it comes to budget negotiations?
• GOP needs to learn how to declare victory
• The closure of Minnesota, America's fiscal future in miniature?
• What government services would you give up for a lower tax bill?

Want to tell your friends about this blog post? Check out the buttons — Tweet, Reblog, Like, Digg This and more — at the bottom of this post. Or you can use the Share This icon to spread the word via email and other popular online avenues. Thanks!

Tweet This Post

If you own a home, you pay property taxes.

And if you're like a lot of other homeowners, the statement you got from your local tax assessor-collector revealed that your taxes headed up while your house's value slipped.

In those situations, you should look into contesting your property valuation and the tax bill upon which it was based.

It's also a good bet that most such appeals are by homeowners in places that have relatively high property taxes. That would put a large number of them in New Jersey.

The median property tax in the Garden State in 2009 was $6,579.

That's the largest median property tax amount amount in the country, according to data compiled by Credit Sesame. And it's this week's By the Numbers figure.

How does that figure compare to the lowest property tax state? The New Jersey median property tax amount, according to the lending data website, was 27 times more than what Louisiana property owners paid.

Here are few more N.J. numbers:

• The $6,579 in taxes represented 1.89 percent of a home's value.
• The tax amount was 7.45 percent of the property owner's income.

Now to the big question: Just how do your property taxes compare?

You can find out at Credit Sesame's interactive map:

Click on the map (or here) to check your state's property tax stats.

Related posts:

• Fighting rising property taxes 
• Property tax appeals on the rise
• How do your property taxes stack up?
• No Schedule L for 2010 property taxes
• By the Numbers archive

Want to tell your friends about this blog post? Check out the buttons — Tweet, Reblog, Like, Digg This and more — at the bottom of this post. Or you can use the Share This icon to spread the word via email and other popular online avenues. Thanks!

Tweet This Post

Tweet This Post

Tweet This Post

Everything right now is all about the deficit, including my posts last week at my other tax blog.

The longer Congress and the President take to agree on where to trim the budget and who should pay more taxes, the closer some sacrosanct tax benefits get to entering the mix.

Among the tax benefits generally thought to be untouchable, but which eventually might come under consideration are the many tax breaks connected to homeownership. A recent study by the Pew Charitable Trusts of the costs and benefits of housing tax subsidies. found that the top home-related tax breaks cost around $304 billion in fiscal year 2010.

That's a lot of budget balancing potential.

Meanwhile, Minnesota's budget crisis offered a preview of what could happen if Congress doesn't reach a deal on increasing the federal debt ceiling.

The political and tax policy battle lines in the North Star State are almost identical to those in our national capital. That's not comforting.

Here's hoping the folks in D.C. are paying attention.

Catch up on the details over at my Bankrate Taxes Blog.

Related posts:

• What's wrong with the Democrats when it comes to budget negotiations?
• GOP needs to learn how to declare victory
• The closure of Minnesota, America's fiscal future in miniature?
• Last week at my other tax blog Archives Page

Want to tell your friends about this blog post? Check out the buttons — Tweet, Reblog, Like, Digg This and more — at the bottom of this post. Or you can use the Share This icon to spread the word via email and other popular online avenues. Thanks!

Tweet This Post

No, that headline question is not a spin-off of the popular television game show.

It's the question being asked as federal lawmakers struggle to come up with a fiscal agreement that will lead to another increase in the U.S. debt ceiling.

Back in March, an NBC-Wall Street Journal poll found 81 percent of those surveyed favored a surtax on millionaires to help cut the deficit. Perhaps that was part of the reason that Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, an Independent, introduced a bill to impose a surtax on millionaires.

Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) took the millionaires' tax a step further, getting enough votes last week from his Senate colleagues, some Republicans included, to take it to a full floor vote on Monday.

Reid's proposal is purely symbolic, a nonbinding "sense of the Senate" resolution that says those making $1 million or more each year should "make a more meaningful contribution to the deficit-reduction effort." 

But such show appears to be all that Congress is equipped to deal with. Senate Democrats reportedly have dropped a 3 percent surtax on millionaires from the official Budget Committee proposal.

More than one way to tax a cat: While a direct tax on wealthier individuals doesn't stand a real chance on Capitol Hill, lawmakers are exploring other ways to get additional money from richer taxpayers.

Obama reiterated his intention to collect more from the country's wealthy in last week's White House Twitter Town Hall: 

It does mean that those who are in the top 1-2 percent, who have seen their incomes go up much more quickly than anybody else, pays a little bit more in order to make sure that we can make the basic investments that grow this country — that's not an unreasonable position to take.

As for how to get that money, Obama has repeatedly championed a limit on the amount of itemized tax deductions that higher-income workers can claim.

Promoting tax Pease: This is not a new tax, although that doesn't matter to the GOP.

Before the Bush tax cuts, wealthier taxpayers had to deal with the personal exemption phaseout, or PEP, and the similar Pease phaseout, named after former Rep. Donald Pease (D-Ohio) who pushed for the law in 1990, which limited the amount of itemized deductions high-earners could claim.

PEP and Pease rules were themselves phased out completely in 2010. The extenders agreement passed at the end of last year keeps them off the books through 2012.

But Obama and many of his Democratic colleagues would like to at least bring back the Pease limits. The prez has suggested doing so in each of his fiscal budget proposals.

Essentially, this limitation reduces the tax benefit of popular deductions for mortgage inter­est, charitable gifts and state-local sales or income taxes, as well as for the lesser claimed write-offs for unreimbursed business expenses, tax preparation fees and safety deposit box expenses under the miscellaneous deduction category.

Hawaii goes first: While we all wait to see if the deduction limitation will make it into any budget or debt ceiling plan, the president's home state of Hawaii has decided its native son has the right deduction idea.

Last month, the Aloha State became the first state to cap the itemized deductions that its wealthier taxpayers can claim.

The new law is in effect for the 2011 through 2015 tax years and limits single taxpayers with adjusted gross income of more than $100,000 to $25,000 in deductions and couples with AGI exceeding $200,000 to deductions of $50,000.

While the move should boost Hawaii's bottom line, it will cost its wealthier taxpayers not only money, but tax prep time. Janet Novack of Forbes notes:

Moreover, the new law requires these folks to figure their tax bills another way, applying a federal partial phaseout of itemized deductions for the better off (U.S. Tax Code Section 68) that has itself been at least temporarily phased out by the George W. Bush tax cuts.  High income Hawaii residents must then use whichever restriction produces the higher tax bill.

Federal effect on state finances: If Congress does reinstate the limit on deductions for wealthier taxpayers, it could affect a lot of state finances.

Many states piggy-back their definitions of taxable income on the federal tax code, so a cap on deductions would increase the state income tax base for them, writes Girard Miller, the Public Money columnist for GOVERNING magazine and a senior strategist at the PFM Group. That would actually produce more state income tax revenue than an increase in federal tax rates.

Also, says Miller, the way Congress caps itemized deductions could impact state and local tax policies and local politics:

To see how this works, let's suppose that Congress decided next year to put a cap on itemized deductions of all kinds, maybe at the level of $100,000. Affluent taxpayers in some states often deduct this much for their state income taxes, local property taxes and mortgage interest. If federal tax policy limits their deductions to a fixed number or a percentage of income, then states with high income tax rates and local governments with high property tax rates would face increased voter resistance from high-income taxpayers who could no longer deduct some of these taxes on their federal returns. The net tax cost of "excessive" state and local taxes would then increase by 35 percent for those taxpayers.

So while you, I and rich folks across the country are watching with great interest what Washington, D.C., will do about the deficit, so too are state tax departments and the legislators who write the laws they enforce.

Related posts:

• What's wrong with the Democrats when it comes to budget negotiations?
• GOP needs to learn how to declare victory
• The closure of Minnesota, America's fiscal future in miniature?
• Tax cutting on Capitol Hill gets personal

Want to tell your friends about this blog post? Check out the buttons — Tweet, Reblog, Like, Digg This and more — at the bottom of this post. Or you can use the Share This icon to spread the word via email and other popular online avenues. Thanks!

Tweet This Post

Sixty-one miles of new train track in Central Florida are a go.

The Congressman's pet project transportation boondoggle SunRail commuter line got the OK from Florida officials.

If all goes according to plan, the $1.28 billion project will link Volusia County with downtown Orlando in 2014.

Republican Rep. John Mica, who has been fighting for years to get the project funded, was elated with this Follow-up Friday news. "This is as significant for the state as when Henry Flagler brought the railroad to Florida and when President Eisenhower initiated the interstate (system)," he said.

But there's already concern that the new train line could be derailed.

Federal funding for SunRail may already be in jeopardy, according to The Miami Herald's Naked Politics blog. The House has suggested eliminating the New Starts program, the transit initiative providing SunRail funding.

And even if the funding mechanism survives the federal budget knife, Florida has to meet an operational deadline. If SunRail isn't running by May 1, 2014, the project will be considered in breach of the contract that supplied the money.

Looks like Mr. Mica still needs to do some arm twisting convincing on Capitol Hill.

Related posts:

• Florida's train to nowhere
• Democrats support tax fraud and waste;
  Republicans hate middle-class workers
• Military sponsorships of NASCAR and other sports again under fire
• Following Follow-up Friday

Want to tell your friends about this blog post? Check out the buttons — Tweet This, Reblog, Like, Digg This and more — at the bottom of this post. Or you can use the Share This icon to spread the word via e-mail and online avenues. Thanks!

Tweet This Post