June 2009

You are currently browsing the monthly archive for June 2009.

images-2President Obama is helping us again (by running bills like this one through war spending appropriations).  We have old clunkers, and he wants to relieve us of them.  Obama signed the Car Allowance Rebate System into law on June 24 to offer us $3,500 to $4,500 for turning in our gas guzzling cars for newer more efficient ones.

If you buy a new car that meets certain gas-saving restrictions, the government will wire money directly to the dealer you are buying a new car from.  To get the cash, the dealer has to trash your old car – it can’t be sold again (must be crushed or shredded).  This will hopefully kick more cash into our market and give the beleaguered dealers some additional assistance to sell their mounting inventory.  But they have to be ready by July 24, and consumers have until November 1 to turn in their old car to get the credit (or whenever the $1 Billion appropriation runs out).

Here is some stuff you need to know (the trade-in car must meet 4 criteria):

1  the car must be drivable (no, you can’t go to Goodwill and trade it in to make a quick buck on a new Chevy),

2  the car must have been continually insured,

3  the car must have been manufactured not earlier than 25 years before the date of the trade-in (1985 or earlier),

4  the vehicle can only get 18 miles to the gallons or less (find out what your car’s fuel economy is here).

Seems like a pretty good deal for those with the right car and a little money to spend on a new shiny new ride.  You can even apply the credit towards a leased car if you want.  Have fun.

Thanks, Jason M. Blumer

“This above all: to thine own self be true, and it must follow, as the night the day, thou canst not then be false to any man.”

William Shakespeare

There is a plethora of aids and resources on the web to help you access some of the federal stimulus funds, look for jobs or learn more about what share the states are getting from the stimulus funds.

1.  Recovery.gov is the main federal site that tracks the progress of the stimulus funds from printing the cash to the creation of greener federal buildings (with a lot of propaganda thrown in for good measure).  The site links you out to many other “opportunities” to do things like find jobs related to the American Recovery and Reimbursement Act.  Go find your dream job now – GoSee

2.  Recovery.gov also tells you how much money has already been paid out, by agency, by category, and by state.  See how much South Carolina has gotten already – GoSee

3.  And if you aim to do business with the federal government, and help them spend some of their stimulus money, you can search potential contracts related to performing work for the federal government.  Check out the site – GoSee (tip, put “sc” or “south carolina” in the keyword/SOL# box to get more specific results.  Or search by agency)

Thanks, Jason M. Blumer

image from editorsweblog.orgOn the way up to Boston yesterday, I sat behind someone on the plane reading the Wall Street Journal. I saw an article I was interested in (something about the Governor of my great state of SC being missing, or something like that).

So, I pulled out my iPhone opened the Wall Street Journal app and read the article for myself. But it got me thinking – why would the WSJ give me that article for free (through the free app) and charge my silver-haired friend on the plane for his newspaper copy of the same thing?

Not sure, but it seems WSJ is doing what a lot of newspapers are doing – jumping into the online world with both feet before thinking through their proper models of service, who reads the paper and how to charge for their online (or iPhone app) services. It seems that if you charge one patron, but don’t charge another, that will eventually tick off everyone.

What do you think? Does the WSJ actually know what they are doing?  Are these different pricing models a mistake that they’ll fix later?  Leave it in the comments.

Did you know that you can’t deduct charitable deductions over $250 unless you have proper substantiation?  Here are some things you can keep on hand just in case the IRS asks:

1.  bank statements

2.  written communication from the charity stating (1) the name of the charity, (2) the date of the contribution and (3) the amount.

3.  credit card statements

4.  cancelled checks

5.  printouts of online donations

But keep in mind, most of these methods will only substantiate donations claimed UNDER $250.  The only thing that will substantiate a deduction in the eyes of the IRS over $250 is a receipt from the charity (#2 above).

“Keep doing what you’ve done, and you’ll keep getting what you’ve gotten.”

Sasha Cohen

1.  Best Selling Car in America – GoSee

2.  Top 100 most mentioned brands on Twitter – GoSee

3.  How to Grow During a Downturn – GoSee

Thanks, Jason M. Blumer

Good to Great at AmazonI love books based upon heavy research.  It’s not based upon someone’s thoughts or beliefs, or even experience.  It’s based upon tons of research, discussions, interviews, research team arguments and market analysis.  I feel I can learn a lot from these types of books.

Good To Great written by Jim Collins is one of those books developed after 5 years of research.  And I’m loving it so far.  I haven’t finished the book yet but I’m half way through.  I wanted to review the book on my blog for the sake of all readers… I highly suggest you read the book when you can.

Ch. 1: Good is the Enemy of Great

Jim Collins states that many schools, churches and schools are good… and that is precisely why they are not great.  Good is okay with most companies and individuals, so they often fail to make the leap to greatness (because they see no need to change).  Jim Collins says he has discovered the underlying variables that make greatness happen.  He and his team analyzed eleven great companies and eleven comparison companies which achieved certain cumulative stock returns that outperformed their competitors for 15 years following their transition point from good to great.

The Collins team analyzed what happened to these great companies at the point they made the transition from good to great.  He called this point of transition the “Black Box”, and sought to analyze what happened inside this Black Box.

Here are some initial findings to their research (which we can all learn from):

1.  Larger-than-life celebrity CEOs had nothing to do with greatness.  Most great CEOs came from inside the organization.

2.  Executive compensation had nothing to do with taking a company from good to great.  Their data does not support compensation being a main driver to executives taking their companies to greatness.

3.  Good to great companies did not primarily focus on what to do to become great, but what not to do and what to stop doing.

4.  Technology had virtually nothing to do with the transition from good to great.

5.  The good to great companies paid little attention to managing people or motivating people – people problems melt away in the good to great companies.

6.  Greatness is not a function of circumstance (e.g., being in the right industry at the right time), but is largely a matter of conscious choice.

To sum up the Collins research, evolving from goodness to greatness involved three broad stages, and two subset stages within each of the three broad categories:

1.  Disciplined People, which includes (1) Level 5 Leaders and (2) “First Who… Then What”

2.  Disciplined Thought, which includes (1) confronting the brutal facts and (2) the Hedgehog Concept, and

3.  Disciplined Action, which includes (1) a Culture of Discipline and (2) Technology Accelerators

It’s exciting to be reading a book where they say they’ve discovered the variables to greatness.  I’m reading with intensity to see what I can change in my company to become the next great company.

The remaining reviews of Good to Great will cover the subsets of each of the three identified broad stages above and I hope you enjoy the upcoming reviews.

Thanks, Jason M. Blumer

(Go to Chapter 2 review here)

As a firm that prepares taxes, I’ve often wondered why just about anybody can prepare taxes for a living and never be questioned.  Did you know that ANYONE can say they are a tax preparer and hang out a shingle?  It’s a little scary, though I’m not a big fan of government intervention for our “protection.”  But that is exactly what is about to happen.

As seen on the Don’t Mess with Taxes blog, IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman announced that he will be submitting a “comprehensive set of recommendations to help the Internal Revenue Service better leverage the tax return preparer community with the twin goals of increasing taxpayer compliance and ensuring uniform and high ethical standards of conduct for tax preparers.”  Read the announcement here.

This helps my firm so that’s cool, but I still HATE federal intervention into our lives to “help us stupid citizens not hurt ourselves.”  Since our firm is a CPA firm, we are already regulated by a state licensing board to ensure compliance and ethics (you can even look up my license to see if I’m legitimate).  This is true for dentists, physicians, barbers and geologists too.  But the federal government needs to get in on the action, I guess.  So, you may see more tax preparation shops go out of business soon if they can’t pass the tests and meet the requirements of Big Brother.

Or you could just refer everyone you know to our firm and we’ll be happy to prepare your taxes ethically and accurately. :)

« Older entries