Follow us!

    Re: NWCULAW IS NO GOOD

    Posted by ... on 4/21/09

    why is that? Has NWCU done something illegal?


    On 4/20/09, Mel wrote:
    > "if I want to put any education costs as a business expense because I
    > feel it will advance/grow my business I will and I have."
    >
    > If you don't care about following the law, maybe NWCU is a good place for you.
    >
    >
    > On 4/20/09, Go pay more... wrote:
    >> Ok since we all want to be lawyers, let's look at a few facts... as a DL the 1st hurdle is the FYLSE or
    >> the Baby Bar, not the tax return...
    >>
    >> most recently October 2008 the results are as follows:
    >>
    >> Taft: 35 took 5 passed 17&37;
    >> Concord: 196 took 28 passed 14.3&37; WTF???
    >> NWCU: 58 took 2 passed 3&37;;
    >>
    >> so why you may want to argue taxes, writeoff's, and any other BS you can muster up to justify paying
    >> between 65 and 200 &37; more to not go to NWCU the facts indicate you will not be at any better of an
    >> advantage unless you consider having less money an advantage... while I realize their are other factors
    >> to consider, w/ out passing the BB you're out!
    >>
    >> While you may think this tax issue effects the validity of NWCU (the oldest DL in CA) the facts
    > indicate
    >> you are wrong and wasting everyone's time...
    >>
    >> while not relevant to a LS forum, if I want to put any education costs as a business expense because I
    >> feel it will advance/grow my business I will and I have.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> On 4/20/09, Linda wrote:
    >>> My husband is a CPA who has researched this forward and backward. He even contacted NWCU last year
    >>> and they admitted the information was in error said they would correct the website. Apparently they
    >>> haven't.
    >>>
    >>> On 4/20/09, Victoria Weaver wrote:
    >>>> Are you a CPA or a tax preparer?
    >>>>
    >>>> Victoria Weaver
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> On 4/19/09, Linda wrote:
    >>>>> Please, don't trust me on the tax issue. (I only have 15 years of experience in taxes.) Do the
    >>>>> research yourself. No deduction is ever possible under section 162.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> On 4/19/09, Victoria Weaver wrote:
    >>>>>> I don't know if that is necessary false. I applied for a tax deduction for my studies at West
    >>>>>> Coast School of Law, who is in the same accreditation boat as NWCU Law. Anyone who is not a
    >>>>>> lawyer can use this as training for a new job. Not everyone is a patent agent.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Victoria Weaver
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> On 4/19/09, Li nda wrote:
    >>>>>>> It still bothers me that they keep the incorrect income tax deduction information on their
    >>>>>>> website. If they get something as simple as this wrong, can we have confidence in their
    >>>>>>> other legal conclusions?
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> On 4/19/09, Victoria Weaver wrote:
    >>>>>>>> Depends on what you are comparing it against. I think it is, considering that many DL law
    >>>>>>>> students get what they put in to online education. What you get at a school like Concord
    >>>>>>> is
    >>>>>>>> bells and whistles. Concord always brags that students who get a B+ average in thier
    >>>>>>>> program pass the bar with flying colors (like 80&37; of the time, I think). If a student
    >>>>>>>> actually does the studying at NWCU Law, then yes, they will pass.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> They have been around a lot longer, and one year they even beat some ABA schools on the
    >>>>>>> bar
    >>>>>>>> exam (in terms of percentage passing rate).
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Victoria Weaver
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> On 4/18/09, Karen wrote:
    >>>>>>>>> According to the State Bar stats, for the past two years less than one in four of NWCU
    >>>>>>>>> graduates have passed the bar on the first attempt. Is this considered pretty good?
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> On 4/17/09, Victoria Weaver wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>> What do you base that on? Certainly not baby bar or bar passage rate. If you were to
    >>>>>>>>>> base it on those, you would have to concede that Concord or Oakbrook are at the top of
    >>>>>>>>>> the curve, but you pay through the nose at Concord and Oakbrook requires an in-
    >>>>>>>>>> residence requirement. NWCU has pretty good baby bar and bar passage rates, and is
    >>>>>>>>> half
    >>>>>>>>>> the price of a lot of the other schools. I chose to transfer to NWCU because of the
    >>>>>>>>>> good pass rates, the price, and the fact it has been around for a long time.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> ALU has high tuition and the bar pass rates are less than stellar. If you were to
    >>>>>>>>>> actually give some reasons, then perhaps we might consider agreeing with you. I am not
    >>>>>>>>>> one who advocates DETC accreditation, but that is actually another thing against ALU
    >>>>>>>>>> (because Taft and Concord have that designation).
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> Victoria Weaver
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> On 4/17/09, Mel wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>> 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.