Tax Preparation Editing and Proofreading Services

A tax preparer classifies a client's side business as a hobby loss deduction with a note in the file reading "took an aggressive position on this one." The client, signing the return, has no idea what that phrase means for them specifically: whether it raises their audit risk meaningfully or barely at all, what documentation they would need if the position were ever questioned, or what the actual downside is if the position does not hold up. The preparer knows what "aggressive" means in professional shorthand. The client, who is the one whose name is on the return, does not.

We edit what tax preparers produce to explain a specific position taken on a client's return — position risk explanations and their practical implications, documentation requirements for a specific claimed position, audit exposure disclosures in plain language, and the correspondence explaining to a client what a specific tax treatment actually means for them. Our editors work on the sentence that has to translate professional risk language into something the person signing the return can actually weigh.

The specific, translated risk explanation is what a client actually needs behind a position described as aggressive or uncertain, and its failure is professional shorthand that means something precise to the preparer and nothing actionable to the client who has to decide whether to accept it. Took an aggressive position describes the preparer's own risk assessment in language built for other preparers, not for a client deciding whether they are comfortable with what is being filed under their name. We work through these so a position's actual risk is explained in terms of what it means for the client specifically — this increases the statistical likelihood of an audit inquiry on this specific deduction, though not necessarily the whole return; if challenged, the position would likely result in this deduction being disallowed rather than penalties, given the documentation on file — since a client needs to know what could actually happen, not simply that a risk category was assigned; so documentation requirements are stated specifically, given that a position relying on records the client has not actually kept is a materially weaker position than one fully documented, and the client needs to know what to gather or preserve now, not discover the gap during an audit; so the client is told explicitly what choosing a more conservative alternative would look like, including the tax cost of that alternative, rather than being presented with only the position taken and no comparison; so any position that deviates from how a similar item was treated in a prior year is flagged, given that an inconsistent position across years is itself a specific, additional risk factor the client needs to understand; and so a client's specific question about what happens if the position is questioned receives a direct, concrete answer, not a repetition of the word "aggressive." Explanations written this way mean a client is actually consenting to what is being filed under their name, not simply signing where indicated.

Everything you send is treated in confidence, including tax data, client information and correspondence. We are editors rather than tax preparers, CPAs or tax attorneys, and we offer no view on tax positions, audit risk or filing determinations. What we can do is make sure the client understands what they are actually agreeing to.