Editing H&R Block (section)

=== Controversies ===
==== H&R Block's own taxes 2005 ====
In August 2005, H&R Block announced that it had overstated its earnings for 2003 and 2004 by $91.1 million. The company stated that it had "insufficient resources" to identify and report complex transactions in its corporate tax accounting. On February 23, 2006, the company said in its quarterly results that it had miscalculated its own state income taxes for 2005 and 2004, and that it owed an additional $32 million in back taxes.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/12659/000095013408012051/c27745e10vk.htm#114 |title=Financial Statements and Supplementary Data |publisher=United States Securities and Exchange Commission |access-date=2011-11-14}}</ref><ref>{{cite news| url=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,185912,00.html | publisher=[[Fox News]] | title=H&R Block Flubs Its Own Taxes | date=2011-10-21}}</ref>

==== Social Security numbers 2005 ====
In December 2005, H&R Block sent its customers free copies of its TaxCut software, and the mailing labels on the packages mistakenly included the recipients' [[Social Security number]]s. The company said it sent the promotional mailing to former customers and people whose names were taken from purchased lists. It said it is legally required to hold on to customers' tax information, including Social Security numbers, for three years. H&R Block said no customer data has been lost or stolen as a result of the mistake, and that less than 3 percent of the mailings were involved.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/taxes/2006-01-04-hr-block-privacy_x.htm |title=H&R Block makes error in software mailing |work=[[USA Today]] |date=2006-01-04 |access-date=2011-11-14 |first=David |last=Twiddy}}</ref>

==== Refund anticipation loans 2006 ====
California Attorney General [[Bill Lockyer]] sued H&R Block in February 2006, alleging the company's [[refund anticipation loan]] (RAL) business violated state and federal laws in its marketing and providing of high-cost RALs mainly to low-income clients. The lawsuit also alleged Block received a "substantial portion of the loan fees", in some cases purchasing up to 49.9 percent of the loans, and further alleged that H&R Block at times held onto a customer's tax refund for purposes of paying off RAL-related debt from previous years, including that claimed by other banks or tax preparers.  The complaint stated, "Therefore, Block clients who are claimed to owe debt from a prior year are led to expect a loan, but instead find themselves in a collection proceeding."<ref>[https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-lockyer-files-lawsuit-against-hr-block-illegally-marketing-and "Attorney General Lockyer Files Lawsuit Against H&R Block for Illegally Marketing and Selling High-Cost Loans as 'Instant' Tax Refunds"], Press release from the Office of California Attorney General, Feb. 15, 2006.</ref>

The company responded that it "believes the refund lending program is both fair and legal, and will vigorously defend against the complaint". On January 2, 2009, California Attorney General [[Edmund G. Brown Jr.]] reached a $4.85 million settlement with H&R Block, which prohibits the company from deceptively marketing high-cost refund anticipation loans as early "[[tax refund]]s". The company set aside $2.45 million in restitution for customers if they purchased a "refund anticipation loan" or a "[[refund anticipation check]]" through H&R Block between January 1, 2001 and December 31, 2008. In addition, H&R Block agreed to pay $500,000 in penalties and $1.9 million in fees and costs.<ref>{{cite news|author=Jerry LaMartina |url=http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2006/02/13/daily27.html |title=AG sues H&R Block over refund-anticipation loans |work=Sacramento Business Journal |date= 2006-02-15|access-date=2011-11-14}}</ref><ref>{{cite press release |url=http://ag.ca.gov/newsalerts/release.php?id=1645& |title=Attorney General Brown Reaches Agreement with H&R Block Prohibiting Deceptive Marketing of Tax Refund Loans |publisher=Office of the Attorney General, State of California Department of Justice |date=2009-01-02 |access-date=2011-11-14}}</ref> In 2011, H&R Block ceased offering RALs altogether, a move praised by consumer rights activists.<ref>{{cite press release |url=http://www.consumerfed.org/pdfs/pr_AdvocatesApplaudBlockDroppingRALs_%2091411_FINAL.pdf|title=Consumer Advocates Applaud H&R Block Decision to Forego RALs and Urge Republic, Jackson Hewitt and Liberty to Stop Making High Cost Loans |publisher=Consumer Federation of America|date= 2011-09-14}}</ref>

==== Express IRA 2006 ====
On March 16, 2006, New York Attorney General [[Eliot Spitzer]] sued H&R Block, accusing the company of deceptive marketing of its Express IRA retirement accounts. The lawsuit alleged the company assessed fees, including set-up fees, annual fees, and account closing fees that, for 85% of account holders, resulted in the account losing money.<ref>[https://money.cnn.com/2006/03/15/news/companies/spitzer_hr/index.htm Spitzer brings fraud suit against H&R Block], CNN Money, David Ellis, March 16, 2006. "... One unnamed 32-year-old from Albany, NY resident cited in the complaint opened an Express IRA account in 2002 with the minimum contribution of $300. The account earned $10.29 in interest over the past four years; the account holder paid $45 in fees over that same period of time... "</ref> However, in July 2007, a New York state judge dismissed much of the lawsuit.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/13/business/13block.html |title=Judge Mostly Clears Block |work=[[The New York Times]] |date=2007-07-13 |access-date=2011-11-14}}</ref> Justice Karla Moskowitz of the State Supreme Court excused Block and five of its units from the lawsuit. She let stand the portion of the complaint concerning another unit, H&R Block Financial Advisers, but dismissed allegations of common law fraud. At the time of the ruling, H&R Block said it believed the remaining assertions lacked merit and that it would appeal. On January 6, 2009, a New York state appeals court overruled trial justice Karla Moskowitz's July 2007 ruling and reinstated the lawsuit against H&R Block Inc that accused the company of fraudulently marketing Express IRA retirement accounts to hundreds of thousands of lower-income clients nationwide.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5075Y120090108 |title=N.Y. court reinstates IRA lawsuit against H&R Block |publisher=[[Reuters]] |date= 2009-01-08|access-date=2011-11-14}}</ref> The matter was settled in 2009, and H&R Block agreed to pay $11.4 million to $19.4 million of fees to customers and $750,000 in fees and other costs.<ref name="Stempel10">{{cite news |title=H&R Block settles nationwide IRA lawsuit |last1=Stempel |first1=Jonathan |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hrblock-cuomo-settlement/hr-block-settles-nationwide-ira-lawsuit-idUSTRE60348120100104 |publisher=[[Reuters]] |date=4 January 2010 |access-date=1 March 2018}}</ref>