Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
SK in CV
Participant[quote=captcha]
A guy I know is buying a house. He and his wife filed paper return back in March, but for some weird reason his processed tax return was not entered into the system until few days ago. The lender would not accept IRS-stamped copy of processed tax return. He had to wait for data monkey to input all the numbers, which finally happened this week. He was originally scheduled to close near the end of May.
It was/is an FHA loan.[/quote]
This is both in response to this comment and the original poster. Tax returns on extension aren’t due until 10/15/10. Unless underwriting has become even more strict than it was in the old days, it is usually acceptable to provide the documents which substantiate income (W-2’s, 1099′, etc.) for a tax return which isn’t yet complete. Along with authorization for the lender to receive a copy (or now just a facsimilie) of the return once it’s filed. In the old days, when extensions were returned by the IRS stamped “Approved”, that approved extension was sometimes requested. But the IRS no longer does that, extensions are automatic, the form doesn’t even require a signature. Sometimes they asked for a copy of that form, but it was pretty much meaningless.
The OP is essentially in that same position, although the return is complete, just not filed and processed as far as the IRS is concerned. If the money has been paid, its a no harm, no foul kinda thing with the IRS. And it should be with the lender too. A simple explanation should suffice.
Any lenders agents out there that can verify that underwriters now require a filed return, even though it may not be yet due to the IRS? Surely they wouldnt require that when processing a loan in say February or March, before even the original due date, without extension. I’m not sure why this would be any different.
Participant[quote=captcha]
A guy I know is buying a house. He and his wife filed paper return back in March, but for some weird reason his processed tax return was not entered into the system until few days ago. The lender would not accept IRS-stamped copy of processed tax return. He had to wait for data monkey to input all the numbers, which finally happened this week. He was originally scheduled to close near the end of May.
It was/is an FHA loan.[/quote]
This is both in response to this comment and the original poster. Tax returns on extension aren’t due until 10/15/10. Unless underwriting has become even more strict than it was in the old days, it is usually acceptable to provide the documents which substantiate income (W-2’s, 1099′, etc.) for a tax return which isn’t yet complete. Along with authorization for the lender to receive a copy (or now just a facsimilie) of the return once it’s filed. In the old days, when extensions were returned by the IRS stamped “Approved”, that approved extension was sometimes requested. But the IRS no longer does that, extensions are automatic, the form doesn’t even require a signature. Sometimes they asked for a copy of that form, but it was pretty much meaningless.
The OP is essentially in that same position, although the return is complete, just not filed and processed as far as the IRS is concerned. If the money has been paid, its a no harm, no foul kinda thing with the IRS. And it should be with the lender too. A simple explanation should suffice.
Any lenders agents out there that can verify that underwriters now require a filed return, even though it may not be yet due to the IRS? Surely they wouldnt require that when processing a loan in say February or March, before even the original due date, without extension. I’m not sure why this would be any different.
Participant[quote=captcha]
A guy I know is buying a house. He and his wife filed paper return back in March, but for some weird reason his processed tax return was not entered into the system until few days ago. The lender would not accept IRS-stamped copy of processed tax return. He had to wait for data monkey to input all the numbers, which finally happened this week. He was originally scheduled to close near the end of May.
It was/is an FHA loan.[/quote]
This is both in response to this comment and the original poster. Tax returns on extension aren’t due until 10/15/10. Unless underwriting has become even more strict than it was in the old days, it is usually acceptable to provide the documents which substantiate income (W-2’s, 1099′, etc.) for a tax return which isn’t yet complete. Along with authorization for the lender to receive a copy (or now just a facsimilie) of the return once it’s filed. In the old days, when extensions were returned by the IRS stamped “Approved”, that approved extension was sometimes requested. But the IRS no longer does that, extensions are automatic, the form doesn’t even require a signature. Sometimes they asked for a copy of that form, but it was pretty much meaningless.
The OP is essentially in that same position, although the return is complete, just not filed and processed as far as the IRS is concerned. If the money has been paid, its a no harm, no foul kinda thing with the IRS. And it should be with the lender too. A simple explanation should suffice.
Any lenders agents out there that can verify that underwriters now require a filed return, even though it may not be yet due to the IRS? Surely they wouldnt require that when processing a loan in say February or March, before even the original due date, without extension. I’m not sure why this would be any different.
ParticipantWhy don’t you just tell them the truth. Your return has just been or just about to be filed, and the IRS hasn’t processed it yet. I presume it is still standard practice for underwriters to request and receive authorization to receive copies of returns from the IRS (which it sounds like you’ve already provided). They’ll get the copy (or transcript) of the return after it’s processed.
Essentially the lender is in the exact same position as they are when a borrower has a valid extension to file their return.
ParticipantWhy don’t you just tell them the truth. Your return has just been or just about to be filed, and the IRS hasn’t processed it yet. I presume it is still standard practice for underwriters to request and receive authorization to receive copies of returns from the IRS (which it sounds like you’ve already provided). They’ll get the copy (or transcript) of the return after it’s processed.
Essentially the lender is in the exact same position as they are when a borrower has a valid extension to file their return.
ParticipantWhy don’t you just tell them the truth. Your return has just been or just about to be filed, and the IRS hasn’t processed it yet. I presume it is still standard practice for underwriters to request and receive authorization to receive copies of returns from the IRS (which it sounds like you’ve already provided). They’ll get the copy (or transcript) of the return after it’s processed.
Essentially the lender is in the exact same position as they are when a borrower has a valid extension to file their return.
ParticipantWhy don’t you just tell them the truth. Your return has just been or just about to be filed, and the IRS hasn’t processed it yet. I presume it is still standard practice for underwriters to request and receive authorization to receive copies of returns from the IRS (which it sounds like you’ve already provided). They’ll get the copy (or transcript) of the return after it’s processed.
Essentially the lender is in the exact same position as they are when a borrower has a valid extension to file their return.
ParticipantWhy don’t you just tell them the truth. Your return has just been or just about to be filed, and the IRS hasn’t processed it yet. I presume it is still standard practice for underwriters to request and receive authorization to receive copies of returns from the IRS (which it sounds like you’ve already provided). They’ll get the copy (or transcript) of the return after it’s processed.
Essentially the lender is in the exact same position as they are when a borrower has a valid extension to file their return.
Participant[quote=sd_matt]
But really, do I need to explain this?[/quote]No, you don’t. Further nonsense won’t make it any clearer.
Participant[quote=sd_matt]
But really, do I need to explain this?[/quote]No, you don’t. Further nonsense won’t make it any clearer.
Participant[quote=sd_matt]
But really, do I need to explain this?[/quote]No, you don’t. Further nonsense won’t make it any clearer.
Participant[quote=sd_matt]
But really, do I need to explain this?[/quote]No, you don’t. Further nonsense won’t make it any clearer.
Participant[quote=sd_matt]
But really, do I need to explain this?[/quote]No, you don’t. Further nonsense won’t make it any clearer.
Participant[quote=sd_matt]…..or how bout a merger of Western and Sharia ideas. Pantyhose over the head.
Regarding rednecks; I think the strict Muslims are just extreme versions of good ole boys. They both need someone to be above, to step on. So I find it very ironic and contradictory that the Libs take the side of the Middle East and yet try very actively to “progress” the United States. Which is it? Conservative or Liberal? Pick one and stick to it across the board.
Back to the subject at hand regarding France
It sounds like backlash to me.[/quote]
A few questions on this comment.
Who is it exactly the Muslims are trying to be above? And what is the manifestation of that? I don’t see religious tradition as “being above”.
How do liberals “take the side” of the Middle East? And what exactly is the contradiction that you believe you’ve identified?
Last time I looked, France was in Europe. There are around 1.5 billion Muslims in the world, the majority are not in the Middle East. So what does this have to do with the Middle East?
-
AuthorPosts
