Follow us!

    Re: NWCULAW IS NO GOOD

    Posted by Mel on 4/17/09

    The only good school is Abraham Lincoln University School of Law.

    On 4/16/09, Li nda wrote:
    > A good example of what I was writing follows:
    >
    > Question
    > I have read the general rule of no deduction for law school, but I haven't read
    > anything for my particular situation. I am a registered patent agent with the
    > United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). My point is that there is
    > nothing a patent attorney can do with the USPTO with patents that I cannot do as a
    > patent agent. I have written patents since 2005, I became a registered patent
    > agent in 2008, and am now in law school for one reason: increase my earnings
    > potential.
    >
    > When I am finished with law school I am going to be in the same industry and trade
    > I was before law school. I realize that law school could generally "qualify me
    > for a new trade or business" but at the same time, law school is not qualifying me
    > anymore than I am already to work with the USPTO. The USPTO doesn't really care
    > if I am an agent or an attorney. Both can have clients, both can write the patent
    > applications, both can file the patent apps with the USPTO, and both can prosecute
    > the patent apps through several office actions until the application is dropped or
    > published as a patent.
    >
    > So in your opinion, do I have a shot at a legitimate deduction?
    >
    > Answer:
    > Thanks for your question.
    >
    > No, you cannot deduct your law school costs. It does qualify you for a new trade
    > or business whether you ever pursue that or not. The IRS has ruled specifically
    > in such situations.
    >
    > Hope this helps.
    >
    > John Stancil, CPA
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > On 4/16/09, Li nda wrote:
    >> First, please excuse the typos. Some, but not all are because the Board
    >> apparently won't allow some words. I have no reason why but on average one in
    >> three of my posts go through.
    >>
    >> I wasnít referring to Section 162. But since you brought it up, law school
    >> expenses are never deductible under 162 because it qualifies a person for a new
    >> profession. There are dozens if not hundreds of cases in this area and the
    >> taxpayer always loses. Donít trust me, research it. Or ask NWCU to give you
    >> some cases. I did and they couldnít.
    >>
    >> The tax credits are only available to students enrolled in schools that are
    >> accredited, as defined by the Department of Education. You can view the Taf t
    >> website for more specific details.
    >>
    >> As I wrote earlier, I don't think the NWCU is a bad option for some. But they,
    >> and you, need to get some facts straight.
    >>
    >> The fact that they continue to give incorrect tax info is worrisome.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> On 4/16/09, Res Ipsa Loco wrote:
    >>> NWCU is accredited in the sense that it is "registered" with the CBE. (LOL)It is
    >>> not "accredited" in the sense which you are speaking, but it does not matter.
    (Except if you want an accredited degree)
    >>> Do you now (spelled correctly) see my point. The tuition can still be deducted
    >>> for tax purposes--here is the info from the website:
    >>>
    >>> Tax Deduction
    >>> A tax deduction may be allowed for expenses undertaken to: Maintain or improve
    >>> skills required in one's employment, trade or business, or Meet specific
    >>> requirements of an employer or a law imposed as a condition to retention of
    >>> employment, job status or rate of compensation. (See Treasury Regulation 1.
    >> 162-
    >>> 5.) (My tax man is H & R Boock)
    >>>
    >>> Do your research, and learn how to spell. I understand that an occasional
    >> stray
    >>> key may be hit, but you are incorrectly spelling way too many words in a
    >> single
    >>> sentence. It is irritating.
    >>>
    >>> Res Ipsa Loco
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> On 4/16/09, Li nda wrote:
    >>>> Tree but NWCU is NOT accredited. Do you know see my point.
    >>>>
    >>>> On 4/15/09, Res Ipsa Loco wrote:
    >>>>> Tax credits can be used from any accredited school. There are no strong
    >>>>> points in your argument. NWCU Law is the best around in terms of quality
    >>>>> and price.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Res Ipsa Loco
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> On 4/15/09, L inda wrote:
    >>>>>> I stand corrected with respect to con cord. But T aft is not three
    >>>>>> times and factoring in tax credits the difference is not all that much
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> On 4/14/09, GET NEW INFORMATION wrote:
    >>>>>>> On 4/13/09, Linda wrote:
    >>>>>>>> Based on information I received from all three school, the bar pass
    >>>>>>>> rate over the past five years is lower at NWCU than the other two
    >>>>>>>> accredited schools. And according to the websites, the tuition is
    >>>>>>>> not three times as much.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Linda
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> NWCU is 2850 a year for starters, Concord is 9k+, so I your right....
    >>>>>> it
    >>>>>>> is more than 3 x's as much and as far as bar passage rates again you
    >>>>>> are
    >>>>>>> wrong especially w/ regard to the FYLSE... go to calbar.org
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> On 4/12/09, Linda wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>> You could do worst than Northwestern but I suggest that you also
    >>>>>>>>>> check out the other schools, particularly COn cord and Taf t.
    >>>>>>>>>> Both offer Federal student aid.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/11/09, questions wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>> I am considering Northwest California Law School for a
    >>>>>>>>>>>>> distance learning Law degree. I can not move at this
    >>>>>>>>>>>>> time, I can not quit my job, I have a family who needs me
    >>>>>>>>>>>>> home. I live in Maine and I am about 6 hours from the law
    >>>>>>>>>>>>> school. Has anyone gone/going to NWCULAW? I understand it
    >>>>>>>>>>>>> is unaccredited with the ABA and I understand all I must
    >>>>>>>>>>>>> do to pass the bar and practice law later. Any help would
    >>>>>>>>>>>>> be great thanks so much.

    Posts on this thread, including this one
  • Distance law school Northwest California NWCULAW, 4/11/09, by questions.
  • Re: Distance law school Northwest California NWCULAW, 4/11/09, by Maryanne.
  • Re: Distance law school Northwest California NWCULAW, 4/12/09, by questions.
  • Re: Distance law school Northwest California NWCULAW, 4/12/09, by Linda.
  • Re: Distance law school Northwest California NWCULAW, 4/13/09, by prezcott.
  • Re: Distance law school Northwest California NWCULAW, 4/13/09, by Linda.
  • Re: Distance law school Northwest California NWCULAW, 4/14/09, by GET NEW INFORMATION .
  • Re: Distance law school Northwest California NWCULAW, 4/15/09, by L inda.
  • Re: Distance law school Northwest California NWCULAW, 4/15/09, by Res Ipsa Loco.
  • Re: Distance law school Northwest California NWCULAW, 4/16/09, by Li nda.
  • Re: Distance law school Northwest California NWCULAW, 4/16/09, by Res Ipsa Loco.
  • Re: Distance law school Northwest California NWCULAW, 4/16/09, by Li nda.
  • Re: Distance law school Northwest California NWCULAW, 4/16/09, by Li nda.
  • Re: NWCULAW IS NO GOOD, 4/17/09, by Mel.
  • Re: NWCULAW IS NO GOOD, 4/17/09, by Victoria Weaver.
  • Re: NWCULAW IS NO GOOD, 4/18/09, by Karen.
  • Re: NWCULAW IS NO GOOD, 4/19/09, by Victoria Weaver.
  • Re: NWCULAW IS NO GOOD, 4/19/09, by Li nda.
  • Re: NWCULAW IS NO GOOD, 4/19/09, by Victoria Weaver.
  • Re: NWCULAW IS NO GOOD, 4/19/09, by Linda.
  • Re: NWCULAW IS NO GOOD, 4/20/09, by Victoria Weaver.
  • Re: NWCULAW IS NO GOOD, 4/20/09, by Linda.
  • Re: NWCULAW IS NO GOOD, 4/20/09, by Go pay more....
  • Re: NWCULAW IS NO GOOD, 4/20/09, by Mel.
  • Re: NWCULAW IS NO GOOD, 4/21/09, by ....
  • Re: NWCULAW IS NO GOOD, 4/21/09, by whatever.
  • Re: NWCULAW IS NO GOOD, 4/21/09, by Linda.
  • Re: NWCULAW IS NO GOOD, 4/21/09, by head in the sand.
  • Re: NWCULAW IS NO GOOD, 4/21/09, by Taxboy.
  • Re: NWCULAW IS NO GOOD, 4/21/09, by Linda.
  • Re: NWCULAW IS NO GOOD, 4/21/09, by Laurence.
  • Re: NWCULAW IS NO GOOD, 4/21/09, by Linda.
  • Re: NWCULAW IS NO GOOD, 4/21/09, by wanna be CPA.


  Site Map:  Home Chatboards Legal Jobs Classified Ads Search Contacts Advertise
  © 1996 - 2013. All Rights Reserved. Please review our Terms of Use, Mission Statement, and Privacy Policy.