1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97

How it was created by the accountants.

The accounting trail 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97 is an accounting entanglement created by Joanne Barnes preparing a figure for the trust's court account that was different from the figure on the K-1 that goes to the IRS and the Estate when the figures should be the same; 1,475.97 was prepared for the Court and 816.00 was prepared for the IRS:

To the Court in the Seventh Account for the Trust u/w of H. A. O'Connell at Bk480p1768:
"Payable to the Esate of Jean M. O'Connell ... ... ... ... $ 1,475.97"

To the Court in the First Account for the Estate of Jean O'Connell at Bk467p192:
"Int fm Harold O'Connell Trust  ......................................... 816.00
 Debt fm Harold O’Connell Trust ...................................... 659.97 "

To the IRS and the State in the Estate tax return and it's two amendments:
"4 Interest due Harold O'Connell Trust  ......................................... 816.00
  5 Debt due from Harold O’Connell Trust ..................................... 659.97"

How the family [Anthony O'Connell] is made to appear accountable for the confusion covering the money trails.

1992.02.18   (Edward White to Anthony O'Connell, copy to Jean Nader)
"In order to prepare your mother's 1991 income tax returns, I need the amount that the Harold O'Connell Trust paid her during 1991. In the event the payment was not made in 1991,1 I will need to file the amount which was due as "income with respect to a decedent" on the estate tax and fiduciary tax returns. The cutoff date for your computation will be September 15, 1991. After that date the trust technically terminated, and the income belongs to the beneficiaries of that trust." 

1 1992.05.29  (Anthony O'Connell to Edward White, in part.)
"2. My copy [Jean O'Connell's 1991 IRS Form 1040] also does not show the principal of $125,188.17 paid to my mother by the Lynch Note in April of 1991. It does show the interest. With a gross profit percentage of .79 on the installment sale, about $98,898.65 of the $125,188.17 should have been reported on line 13 of the 1040 as a capital gain. It appears that this omission is up and above the penalties and interest already acknowledged. Why was it not reported? Will you amend the return?"

1992.06.11  (Edward White to Anthony O'Connell, in part.)
"With regard to the income tax matter and the capital gain from the receipt of principal on the Lynch note in April 1991, I was following the 1990 return and simply did not pick up the fact that there was a principal payment in 1991. I will most certainly pay any interest and penalty which might accrue in this regard, and sincerely appreciate your calling it to my attention."

1992.06.30   (Edward White and innocent Jean Nader to the IRS)
"Enclosed is an amended return in this case. The amendment reflects the receipt of $99,337.00 of taxable income which was-due to a principal payment on a note.
This payment was received in the Spring of 1991. Mrs. O'Connell died in September 1991. The original returns were based upon her previous year's return when there was no such payment; At the time of filing the receipt of this capital gain had not been called to the attention of the Co-Executors.
It is requested that the interest and penalty in this case be waived.
Sincerely, Edward J. White    Jean M. Nader  Co-executors"

Brief history

1992.04.22 (Edward White to innocent Jean Nader, enclosure, in part)
"In order to file that return and the subsequent Fiduciary Income tax return we will need an accounting from Tony from the date of his last accounting to the date of death. If he does not want to prepare it, I will not agree to any preliminary disbursal to him at all, and will seek your approval to file suit against him to compel the accounting, plus damages to the estate for his delay. Since that trust terminated on your mother's death, his final accounting is due now and not in October.
There will be no further explanations or written entreaties to him as far as I am concerned. He has the duty and he will perform it under a court order if necessary. Of course he will furnish that receipt."
From enclosure: "Debt from Harold O'Connell Trust   659.97

1992.05.19 (Edward White to Anthony O’Connell, is part)
“2. The K-1 filed by the Trust showed a payment of $816.00 in interest to the estate. You sent a check in the amount of $1475.97 to the estate. What was the remaining $659.97? Do I have this confused with the tax debt/credit situation which ran from the Third Accounting?"

1992.09.08 (Estate tax return to the IRS and State, schedule F)
"4 Interest due Harold O'Connell Trust  ......................................... 816.00
  5 Debt due from Harold O’Connell Trust ..................................... 659.97"

1992.11.13 (Edward White to beneficiaries, in part)
"Of this $659.97 can be ignored as it was repayment of a debt from the O'Connell Trust and not income, and at least $13,388.25 was tax free income"

(Commissioner's Office to Anthony O'Connell, form letter in part)
"This is regarding your seventh accounting" 1
"Interest or income must be listed on your accounting. Please amend your accounding to reflect these amounts. Thanks, Stephanie"

1 Prepared by Joanne Barnes. Joanne Barnes would not amend her accounting. Perhaps this was about the $816.00

1993.02.12 (Joanne Barnes [Forrest Balderson] to Anthony O'Connell, in part)
" The final point in your letter is in regards how to treat the $1,475.97 of cash which was paid to your mother's estate in 1992. This is just a cash transfer to cure a cash deficiency as of the date of death and NOTHING else. On page 4 of the Seventh Account, your mother owed the Trust at the end of the Sixth Account $3,705.74 but you had underdistributed $5,181.71 of cash through her date of death. The $1,475.97 just completes what was due her. The transfer to her estate has no tax effect for either 1991 or 1992."

Note: Missing $659.97. The numbers to the Court are mentioned but not the numbers to the IRS. The numbers $659.97 and $816.00 are not mentioned and are not on the spreadsheets. I believe the family would need the help of the Court and the IRS and their cooperation with each other to remove the accounting entanglement 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97. The family is powerless against the accountants.

1993.03.20 (approved) (First Court account for the Estate, in part)
"Int fm Harold O'Connell Trust  ......................................... 816.00 "(Book 467 page 192)
"Debt fm Harold O’Connell Trust ...................................... 659.97 "(Book 467 page 192)


1993.06.13 (First amended Estate tax return to the IRS and State, schedule F, in part)
"4 Interest due Harold O'Connell Trust  ......................................... 816.00
  5 Debt due from Harold O’Connell Trust ..................................... 659.97"

1993.10.04 (approved) (Seventh Court account for the Trust, in part)
"Payable to the Esate of Jean M. O'Connell ... ... ... ... $ 1,475.97" (Book 480 page 1768)

1995.04.10 (Second amended Estate tax return to the IRS and State, schedule F, in part)
"4 Interest due Harold O'Connell Trust  ......................................... 816.00
  5 Debt due from Harold O’Connell Trust ..................................... 659.97"

1999.08.09 (Anthony O’Connell to Jesse Wilson and Henry Mackall, in part)
“To keep this Twelth Account simple and clear I will only address one of the known entanglements. In short, the CPA (firm) did the Trust's Seventh Court Account in a manner that required me to pay the Estate $ 1,475.97. The lawyer discovers that this is $659.97 too much. I can't get the CPA (firm) or the lawyer to address this $659.97 debt much less pay it back. This one is easy to see because it is clearly stated in the beginning of the Estate accounting as a Debt from the Harold O'Connell Trust 659.97

2000.08.08 (Jesse Wilson, Report to the Judges, in part)
“5. The said trustee has also filed a Twelfth Account in which he reports as an asset $659.97 "due from the Estate of Jean M. O’Connell".  A copy of that "account" is enclosed herewith as Exhibit 3.
6. The Estate of Jean M. O’Connell, deceased, Fiduciary No. 49160, was closed in the Commissioner of Accounts office after approval of a Final Account on May 31, 1994.
7. The said $659.97 was the subject of correspondence between the said trustee and Edward J. White, attorney and co-executor of the estate of Jean M. O’Connell, copies of which are attached hereto as Exhibits 4 and 5. In his letter,
Exhibit 5, the trustee explains that the $659.97 is part of a net income payment of $1,475.97 which the trust owed the estate of Jean M. O’Connell. In that same letter, the trustee states that "At this point in time, I believe Mr. Balderson and I are of one mind that the estate does not owe the trust and the trust does not owe the estate".
Mr. Balderson was a CPA for the estate. Both of these letters were provided to the Commissioner of Accounts by the trustee in support of his "Twelfth Account".
8. The trustee also provided the Commissioner with a copy of a page from a "Jean M. O’Connell estate tax analysis" which shows $659.97 under "Assets" of that estate as "Debt from Harold O’Connell Trust".  A copy of that page is attached as Exhibits 6.
From a review of this information the Commissioner finds that there is no evidence to support an assertion by the trustee that the $659.97 is an asset of the trust. To the contrary, it appears that either it is not a debt at all, or, from the estate's point of view, it was money owed by the trust to the estate, i.e. an asset of the estate of Jean M. O’Connell. That estate has been closed for more that six years.
Accordingly, the foregoing Eleventh Account of Anthony M. O’Connell, Trustee has been marked a "Final Account" by the undersigned and is hereby approved as a Final Account in the trust under the will of Harold A. O’Connell and is filed herewith.
In the event that the trustee is successful in recovering $659.97 or any other funds which are proper trust assets to be accounted for, such may be reported to the Commissioner of Accounts by an Amended Inventory and, thereafter, accounted for by proper accounts.”
(Jesse Wilson, Report to the Judges)


(1) If you did not know the accounting trail 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97 before talking to the accountants, would you know it after talking to them?

(2) If you showed the accountants the accounting trail 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97 would they recognize it?

(3) Would they recognize that Joanne Barnes did it? Do the accountants frame their clients with their accounting? Are they ever held accountable for their accounting; for correcting it; for exposing it?

(4) Would they correct/untangle it?

(5) Have the numbers $816.00 and $659.97 vanished from recognition? Is it understandable how money vanished? Is it understandable that the accounting trails at Bk467p191 have never been exposed in spite of multiple approval precedures?

(6) Given the nineteen (19) year history of the accounting trail 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97, how difficult do you think it would be to expose the accounting trails behind Bk467p191, untangle the accounting entanglements, and find out where the money went?


Who ever controls the accounting entanglements controls the people and assets that are entangled. This is one reason that I have not entered into a sales contract for Accotink since 1992. The family is powerless to stop the accountants from creating accounting entanglements, powerless to stop the accountants from making the family appear accountable for them, and powerless to remove them. All the accounting entanglements including 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97 remain on the records of the Court, the State, and the IRS.