On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 12:54 PM, Sharon Burnett <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> In our policy the tax department will notify us when an audit year is
> complete and we can review our records with tax audit designation for
> destruction.


which is all well and good, but should like with litigation shouldn't the
tax department notify you first what records should be on hold?
My point is that an audit (tax, procedural or whatever) is just like a
litigation hold it tolls the retention period. I can remember an
organization that had main department but also several district groups that
reported to central. There were retention periods that had the whatever + x
years unless audited. The problem was that not every district got audited
each year. only a select few did. so there was a problem with determining
what or when something could be destroyed.

I would prefer to to see audits, investigations or whatever be treated the
same as litigation, that is a hold is applied when notification is sent.
having the until audit completed type phrasing only adds confusion for the
user who normally wouldn't know when a tax audit is taking place and
shouldn't know that an investigation is taking place (wouldn't want any
early destruction)

Just because it has been done one way for so long doesn't mean we shouldn't
reexamine things and try to improve what is being done.


> Retention time for contracts (at least in my world) has to take into
> consideration state statute of limitations (6 years in Washington state),
> tax audit (state & federal), + whatever else. An example might be
> construction contracts which are kept for a longer time period.
>
> Does that help Peter?


well that surely looks like the same process that i've used in the past
Sharon. glad to know like minds think alike.

Pak

-- 
Peter Kurilecz CRM CA
[log in to unmask]
Richmond, Va

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]