waiwai933

Ah looks like there's both the PDF and online option; I filed with the PDF version because you can save your history but I guess if Claude can navigate and fill in the online option then I have less quibble about being able to keep progress. Thanks!

I don't know that I'd trust it with an FBAR given it's an interactive PDF myself, but good to hear that it was able to do it - maybe I'll get fed up doing the FBAR manually one year and trust an agent to do so.

I appreciate the recommendation, but as it happens I have already solved the estimated issue (mostly by just preparing a full return with estimated next year's figures, which while time-heavy is going to be more accurate). And for what it's worth, I suspect it wouldn't work for me - cross-border is extraordinarily complicated because of the tax treaties (indeed there is a dedicated IRS form to disclose the effect and rationale of any treaty based position), and given there is no obvious note on the documentation for it that there is cross-border support I doubt there is.

(And as I said to another commenter, I think it would be advisable in this thread for people to expressly acknowledge or disclaim any interest in or prior experience with any particular product)

Are you saying I should use this (or it looks like one of their portfolio companies) as my return preparer, or as a replacement for Claude my return-checker? If the former, I would want to know why I should trust it; if the latter, I would want to know why I should pay for their services given I am already playing Anthropic for a subscription plan anyway.

(It would also help to know if you had a financial interest in or prior experience with this company)

I have a non-trivial tax situation, as a US citizen living abroad. I prepare my own tax returns, never having found a cross-border tax preparer I trust, and have for the past few years, fed my draft return along with all the supporting paperwork into Claude. It has:

1. found errors, e.g. where I used the incorrect exchange rate (and managed to work out how I had made that error, which I was impressed by)

2. found items which would appear to be errors except for context it did not know

3. flagged areas where it disagreed with me as to the correct tax treatment, but accepted that the law is ambiguous (and in some cases I preferred its interpretation after additional research and in other cases I did not)

4. flagged areas where it disagreed with IRS guidance, and only acknowledged said guidance after I provided links to it

5. provided highly inaccurate estimated tax calculations, and not been able to fix its estimates even when challenged

So my takeaway is that it is a very useful tool for tax, but perhaps unsurprisingly, it is not good enough to dump all your paperwork into and expect a shiny return you don't need to check. (Possibly it is if you just have a W-2 and no other substantial income, but I can't speak for that scenario.)

I don't think there's anything to suggest Uber refused to pay the arbitration award? They just stated that they disagreed with the outcome.

(Which is not to say there's not plenty to dislike about this whole case, including the fact it's forced arbitration...)

The author seems to just assume the hot dog has stayed exactly the same size at 8"; I suppose it's unlikely it'd have gotten larger, but that seems a big assumption to base the entire analysis on.

Newer fleets will have GPS units on board that report back to Control, but it's not universal and I don't believe there are industry-wide standards or APIs. Signalbox is definitely extrapolating from TD/TRUST/Darwin, not GPS reports.

Why is Apple Watch series 0 even listed? I can _sort of_ see the argument for discontinued form factors generally even though I'd disagree with it being useful to show, but series 0 wasn't a different form factor even.

I think it may help to clarify that there are two Regulations which seem to have been muddled in the comments:

* Regulation 2023/1670 provides, inter alia, that smartphone manufacturers must make replacement batteries available to consumers, except where the 80%/1000 cycle criteria is met, in which case replacement batteries can be made only available to professional repairers. There is also a requirement for it being able to replace the battery but this does permit use of non-trivial tools under certain circumstances.

* Regulation 2023/1542 provides that portable batteries (not limited to smartphones) must be readily end-user replaceable if they meet certain criteria unless the strict waterproofing/medical industry criteria are met.

Those articles don't seem to support what you're saying? Russia's apps aren't preinstalled, they're just offered as suggestions, and India never got their app installed. I certainly don't see anything that mentions background processes in either article either.