Guests - Robert "The Tax Preparer", Ian Faith
Watch on YouTube
Robert “The Tax Preparer”: Arizona Tax Conformity Became an Expensive Political Fight
Kathleen Winn opened with an issue most Arizona taxpayers probably never expected to become political: the routine process of making state tax law conform to changes in the federal tax code.
To explain what happened, Winn brought in Robert, an experienced tax professional she identified for the discussion as “Robert the Tax Preparer.” His concern centered on the federal tax changes included in President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act and the delay before Arizona conformed its own tax code to those provisions.
Robert said Arizona normally handles federal tax conformity late in the year or early in the following year, giving taxpayers and preparers clear rules before the April filing deadline. This year was different.
“In all my years of over 40 years of doing tax returns, this was the worst year we’ve ever had delaying the conformity of the federal tax laws,” Robert said.
According to Robert, Arizona did not complete conformity until June 13, 2026—well after the traditional April 15 filing deadline. He blamed the delay on Gov. Katie Hobbs’ repeated rejection of earlier Republican-backed conformity efforts.
The result, he said, is that many Arizonans who filed before the law changed may now need to amend their state returns.
Robert Says Hundreds of Thousands of Arizonans Could Be Affected
Robert cited an Arizona Department of Revenue estimate that roughly 30 percent of Arizona taxpayers could be affected by the conformity changes.
With approximately 3 million tax returns filed annually in Arizona, he calculated that the number of potentially affected returns could approach 900,000.
Then he put a price on it.
If a professional charges even $150 to prepare an amended return, Robert estimated the collective cost to taxpayers could reach approximately $135 million.
That figure was his calculation based on the assumptions discussed, but his larger point was that government delays can create costs even when the eventual tax change benefits the taxpayer.
Someone has to reopen the return.
Someone has to review the numbers.
Someone has to prepare and file the amendment.
And for many taxpayers, that person will charge a fee.
“The other side of the coin is a lot of people who file tax returns aren’t even aware of the fact that they should file an amended return,” Robert said.
That may be the most important practical takeaway.
People frequently hand their documents to a CPA or tax preparer, sign the completed return and move on with their lives. They may never know that a later change in state law gives them money back unless their preparer contacts them.
The Problem Is With the Arizona Return, Not the Federal Return
Robert emphasized that the issue does not require taxpayers to amend their federal return simply because Arizona acted late.
The federal law was already in place.
The problem is Arizona.
“This only affects the state return,” Robert said.
That distinction matters because it narrows the burden. An affected taxpayer would generally be dealing with the Arizona filing rather than reopening the entire federal process.
Still, for the taxpayer who believed the matter was finished in February, March or April, another tax filing is another expense and another hassle.
Winn argued that none of it should have been necessary.
Tax conformity has historically been routine. The political fight surrounding Trump’s legislation transformed it into something else.
Seniors, Tips and Overtime Could Create Additional Refunds
Robert said several provisions eventually incorporated into Arizona law could produce additional deductions or refunds for people who filed before conformity was complete.
One example involved the additional deduction for qualifying taxpayers over age 65.
Robert described a $6,000 amount per eligible individual, subject to income limitations. Married couples with two qualifying spouses could potentially receive a larger combined benefit.
Other provisions discussed included tax treatment related to tips and overtime.
The exact benefit depends on a taxpayer’s individual circumstances, but Robert’s message was simple: people who filed before Arizona completed conformity should determine whether an amended return is worth filing.
“You should get more money back,” he said of taxpayers who qualify for deductions they could not originally claim.
He added another wrinkle.
If Arizona owes a taxpayer money because taxes were overpaid, interest may also be due.
That means the delay can cost the state twice: first through administrative work processing amended returns, and then through interest paid on money that should not have been collected in the first place.
Arizona Created a Safe-Harbor Window for Amended Returns
Winn and Robert discussed guidance from the Arizona Department of Revenue establishing a penalty-free safe-harbor period related to conformity.
Taxpayers affected by the timing have until October 15, 2027, under the guidance they discussed, to deal with certain amended-return issues.
Robert cautioned that the safe-harbor language also applies to taxpayers who claimed federal-style deductions on their original Arizona return before the state had formally adopted them.
Some tax professionals, including Robert, made the judgment that Arizona would eventually conform and prepared returns accordingly.
Had the state ultimately refused to conform, those taxpayers might have been required to amend their returns and repay the difference.
Arizona eventually adopted the changes, eliminating that particular risk.
But taxpayers who did not originally receive the new deductions may now have the opposite problem: money could be sitting on the table waiting for them to file an amendment.
For Winn, that makes this more than a political argument.
It is a consumer issue.
If someone filed early, the right question is not whether they are Republican or Democrat.
The question is whether Arizona owes them money.
Winn Blames Hobbs for Politicizing a Routine Process
Winn repeatedly separated the Legislature’s actions from those of the governor.
Republican lawmakers, she argued, tried to move conformity legislation earlier. Hobbs objected to portions of the federal tax package and sought a narrower approach.
Winn accused the governor of turning routine tax administration into a political battle because the federal legislation was associated with Trump.
Robert agreed.
“She politicized it,” he said.
He argued that conformity should have been completed in December or January, before tax season was well underway.
Instead, Winn said the governor initially sought to recognize only selected provisions, including items she portrayed as middle-class tax relief, before a broader agreement was ultimately reached.
Winn also criticized Hobbs for later taking political credit for tax relief after resisting earlier conformity proposals.
Robert called that presentation “totally misleading.”
“Just go behind the lines and look at what really happened,” he said.
The Cost of Government Delay Does Not End With the Taxpayer
Winn broadened the discussion to the Arizona Department of Revenue itself.
Every amended return requires processing.
That means staff time, system resources and additional administrative work for an agency that already processed the original returns.
Robert agreed that the burden extends beyond preparer fees.
Human beings still have to review returns, resolve discrepancies and issue refunds.
The state may also owe interest.
What looked like a political victory during a legislative fight can therefore become an operational mess months later.
Winn described it as an example of government failing to consider the consequences of its own actions.
Robert’s advice was less ideological and more practical: if you filed before Arizona completed conformity, contact your preparer and ask whether your state return should be reviewed.
Ballots Are Going Out: Winn Turns From Taxes to Election Readiness
With Arizona ballots about to be mailed, Winn shifted from taxes to the election itself.
The voter-registration deadline had passed the previous day. Early ballots were scheduled to begin going out October 7.
That means the campaign phase is rapidly giving way to the voting phase.
Winn urged Pima County voters to understand that their ballots may look different depending on where they live. School districts, fire districts, municipal boundaries and legislative districts all create different combinations of races and propositions.
“All government is local,” Winn said. “Your ballot will show you that.”
She pointed to the Tanque Verde School District as one example. Voters there face a proposal connected to modifying facilities currently being used as a high school rather than pursuing what Winn suggested could be the more expensive option of building an entirely new campus.
Her larger plan is to work through the various local ballot questions geographically so voters understand what they are being asked to approve.
LD17 Remains a Major Southern Arizona Battleground
Winn also highlighted Legislative District 17, one of Pima County’s largest and most competitive legislative districts.
She identified Chris King as the Republican Senate candidate and John Winchester and Rachel Keshel as the Republican House candidates.
Keshel is the incumbent.
Winn praised her performance and said she believes Winchester would be a strong replacement for Democrat Kevin Volk.
But candidate preference was secondary to Winn’s central argument: Republicans cannot benefit from registration numbers if their voters do not participate.
Pima County is Arizona’s second-largest county.
Republicans are outnumbered locally.
That means turnout matters disproportionately in statewide contests.
Winn urged volunteers to participate as observers, knock doors and help with get-out-the-vote operations during the final four weeks.
“We are protecting what matters most,” she said, “which is our faith, our families and our communities.”
Runbeck Sends More Than 3,000 Maricopa County Ballots Early
Winn devoted an extended segment to reports that Runbeck Election Services mailed thousands of Maricopa County early ballots before the authorized mailing date.
She cited reporting that 3,126 ballots were sent approximately six days ahead of the scheduled October 7 mailing.
The Maricopa County Recorder’s Office said it had not authorized the early mailing.
For Winn, that fact alone was enough to raise serious concerns.
“Why is the ballot-producing company sending out ballots ahead of an election?” she asked. “Who gave them the authority?”
The county and vendor characterized the issue as a timing error and said the correct ballots had been sent to the correct voters. Winn emphasized that distinction but argued that the mistake still deserved scrutiny because election vendors operate in an area where public confidence depends on strict adherence to procedure.
The problem, she said, is not simply that 3,126 ballots left early.
The problem is that voters are being asked to trust a vendor that failed to follow the authorized schedule.
Winn Points to Runbeck’s History of Election Controversies
Winn revisited previous disputes involving Runbeck and Arizona elections, including a 2022 incident involving ballots with incorrect races.
She also repeated past allegations from Republican election challenges involving chain of custody, ballot handling and other election procedures.
Those earlier allegations have been heavily disputed, and not every accusation resulted in a judicial finding of wrongdoing. Winn nevertheless argued that the recurring controversies are precisely why vendors should face greater scrutiny rather than less.
She was especially critical of Arizona governments continuing to contract with companies after repeated operational problems.
Her standard was simple: if a company’s job is to handle election materials according to specific rules and timelines, following those rules is not optional.
Winn praised the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office for publicly disclosing the early mailing and for releasing information even though she said Runbeck did not initially want its statement made public.
Transparency, she argued, is the only defensible response when mistakes happen.
Election Observers Are Part of Building Trust
Winn used the Runbeck incident to renew her call for election observers.
She stressed that observers are not supposed to intimidate voters, obstruct election workers or disrupt polling places.
Their role is to watch.
“It is so important as we go into this election in this state that we hold each and every election official accountable,” Winn said, “not to intimidate, not to get in their way, to do a fair and free election.”
She urged interested volunteers to contact the Pima County Republican Party for training.
The goal, she said, should be an election in which both sides can accept the process because the process was visible.
Ian Faith: Christmas Told From the Enemy’s Perspective
The second half of the show moved in an entirely different direction.
Ian Faith, Christian apologist and author, joined Winn to discuss his new book, The Devil’s Story of Christmas: A Tale of Holiday Damnation.
The title is intentionally jarring.
Christmas is normally associated with joy, family, worship and peace.
Faith approaches the story from the opposite direction.
What did the birth of Christ look like to the forces that wanted to stop it?
“The demonic must have been watching this saying to themselves, ‘What is going on, and how can we stop it?’” Faith said.
His inspiration came partly from C.S. Lewis’ The Screwtape Letters, along with John Milton, J.R.R. Tolkien and G.K. Chesterton—writers who treated spiritual warfare as something operating beneath the visible events of human life.
The Christmas Story Begins in Genesis, Not Bethlehem
Faith said the book begins not with Mary and Joseph but with Genesis 3:15.
He sees that passage—the promise that the serpent’s head will ultimately be crushed—as one of the earliest biblical prophecies pointing toward Christ.
From there, the book follows the prophetic thread through the Old Testament and eventually into the New Testament nativity story.
Faith cited Isaiah 9, with its description of the coming child as “Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace,” written centuries before the birth of Jesus.
His purpose is to show Christians that Christ did not suddenly appear at Christmas.
“Jesus didn’t start at Christmas,” Faith said. “Jesus was always there.”
The incarnation was a new form of a story already unfolding.
That perspective changes the nativity from a sentimental seasonal scene into what Faith describes as part of a much larger rescue mission.
Faith Calls Christianity a Religion of Spiritual Warfare, Not Passive Sentiment
Faith argued that modern Christianity has sometimes reduced Jesus to what he called a passive figure who never resists evil.
He believes that reading is incomplete.
Ephesians 6 speaks of principalities, powers and the “full armor of God.” Scripture contains both peace and battle language.
Faith said Christians should not confuse faith with passivity.
“God wants Christian men to be strong,” he said.
His argument is spiritual rather than a call to physical violence. Christians, he said, are supposed to recognize evil, resist temptation and act rather than surrender moral judgment to the culture around them.
That is why he calls The Devil’s Story of Christmas more of a spiritual-warfare book than a conventional Christmas book.
The holiday is the setting.
The larger subject is the battle for the human soul.
How Commercialism Can Hollow Out Christmas
Faith’s critique of modern Christmas centers heavily on materialism.
There is nothing wrong with gifts, he said.
The problem comes when gifts replace Christ as the reason for the holiday.
“What happened? We’ve twisted it as human beings,” Faith said.
Christmas becomes a competition over who received what, who spent enough, whether children are sufficiently entertained and whether the holiday lived up to advertising.
The result can be disappointment rather than gratitude.
Faith sees that as exactly the sort of counterfeit the devil would prefer: preserve the outward celebration while quietly removing the spiritual substance.
“If you put Christ central in Christmas, that gift keeps going,” he said.
Material gifts may be broken, discarded or forgotten by January.
Faith does not believe the same is true of spiritual renewal.
“A Child Who Made Us Happy”
Faith offered one of his clearest distinctions in describing the modern fixation on children receiving gifts.
Christmas, he argued, has increasingly become about “making children happy with gifts rather than a child who made us happy.”
That reversal is central to his book.
The original gift was not something placed under a tree.
It was Christ.
Faith encouraged families to read the nativity passages from Luke and Matthew with their children during Advent and Christmas rather than allowing commercial traditions to become the entire celebration.
He specifically praised the Scripture reading featured in A Charlie Brown Christmas as an accessible way of bringing the biblical account back into the holiday.
“Read it to your children,” he said.
Why Christmas and Easter Cannot Be Separated
Faith also connected Christmas directly to Easter.
If the incarnation loses meaning, he argued, the crucifixion and resurrection eventually become detached from the story as well.
“If you get to Christmas with Christ, you’ll celebrate Easter,” Faith said. “If you get to Christmas with the gifts that get thrown away, Easter won’t exist for you.”
Winn agreed.
“If you don’t believe in the birth, how can you believe in the rising from the dead?”
For Faith, spiritual warfare rarely looks like a dramatic horror movie.
It is more often gradual.
A small compromise.
A little distraction.
Another year in which Christ matters less.
He described it as a subtle slope rather than a spectacular attack.
Faith, Fame and the Dark Side of the Music Industry
Winn noted Faith’s earlier career in the music industry and asked whether that experience influenced his view of spiritual warfare.
It did.
Faith said he frequently noticed the atmosphere change when he openly identified himself as a Christian.
He also witnessed successful artists surrounded by fame, money and attention who still seemed profoundly unhappy.
Faith mentioned INXS singer Michael Hutchence, with whom he had professional contact before Hutchence’s death.
He used the tragedy to make a larger point.
People can appear to possess everything the culture says should make them happy and still feel empty.
“They’re trying to grasp onto things in this world that will make them happy and make them whole,” Faith said, “when the reality is what makes you whole and brings you real joy is holding onto Christ.”
Winn connected that discussion to the recent death of her mother.
At the end of life, she said, possessions stop mattering.
“You don’t get to take five suitcases,” Winn said. “You just go.”
What remains is family, faith, relationships, character and what a person contributed during the years between birth and death.
Winn Reflects on Her Mother, Faith and Letting Go
Winn described caring for her mother in her home during the final years of her life.
Her parents had been together since they were teenagers and remained married for 55 years before Winn’s father died.
Her mother lived almost another 14 years.
In the final weeks, Winn said, there was a sense that her mother was ready to go.
Because she had been raised Catholic, receiving the last rites became an important and peaceful part of those final days.
For Winn, the experience reinforced the deeply personal nature of faith.
Human beings do not all experience God in exactly the same way.
But giving someone the freedom and dignity to maintain that relationship matters.
She also spoke about surrender.
She once considered surrender a weakness.
Life taught her otherwise.
Sometimes a person reaches a point where there is no clever strategy, no amount of control and no human answer sufficient to solve what is happening.
That is when surrender to God becomes strength rather than defeat.
Faith called good works “the fruits of our faith.”
Grace saves, he said, but genuine faith should still produce action.
“Go and do likewise,” he said, invoking Christ’s command after the parable of the Good Samaritan.
Christian Infighting Gives the Enemy an Opening
Winn asked Faith about divisions among Christians.
Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, evangelicals and nondenominational Christians may share foundational beliefs while fighting intensely over secondary questions.
Faith believes that division becomes spiritually destructive when it overwhelms what Christians hold in common.
“We all believe in the core tenet,” he said, pointing to Christ’s birth, ministry, crucifixion and resurrection.
Then come the disputes.
The pope.
Mary.
Grace.
Church authority.
Different traditions.
Those arguments may matter theologically, but Faith warned that constant infighting can repel people who are newly exploring Christianity.
A person searching for peace enters a religious community and instead finds another battlefield resembling social media.
“I thought faith was going to make me feel better,” Faith imagined such a person thinking. “I argue with enough people online. Why do I need to be arguing with more people about who God is?”
For Faith, that fragmentation can become another form of spiritual warfare.
Social Media, Self-Worth and the Attack on Young People
Faith and Winn also discussed social media.
Faith sees two competing realities.
Social media can connect families, spread ideas, create community and encourage faith.
It can also become a surveillance system and a machine for dissatisfaction.
Young women are constantly shown images suggesting they are not thin enough, attractive enough, fashionable enough or successful enough.
Winn connected that to a broader concern that younger generations are being taught to dislike who they are.
Faith said that message becomes spiritually dangerous when it separates people from the idea that they were intentionally created by God.
Winn argued that children themselves have become targets of ideological and cultural battles, citing abortion, gender medicine and declining birth rates as evidence of a society increasingly disconnected from traditional ideas about family.
Faith tied the argument back to a section of his book dealing with Herod’s slaughter of children around Bethlehem.
He sees a recurring theme throughout history: attacks on innocence disguised as necessity, convenience or moral progress.
“The devil’s no fool,” Faith said. “They’re very clever in making you believe something that makes your life more convenient.”
That is Faith’s theological interpretation, but it drives his larger argument: evil rarely introduces itself as evil.
It usually arrives as an easier option.
Herod, the Heavenly Host and the Nativity as a Battle Scene
Faith believes readers often miss the military imagery surrounding the nativity.
The “heavenly host” appearing over Bethlehem, he noted, can be understood as a heavenly army.
That raises a question he wants readers to ask:
Why was an army of angels there?
The conventional nativity is often depicted as quiet, soft and peaceful.
Faith’s retelling puts cosmic conflict around it.
Herod wants the child dead.
Mary and Joseph flee to Egypt.
Angelic messengers intervene.
Prophecy is being fulfilled while earthly political power tries to stop it.
Faith portrays demonic forces as whispering and maneuvering behind those events while Gabriel, Michael and the heavenly host operate on the other side.
It is theological fiction built around Scripture, and Faith is careful to distinguish the two.
“This is not Scripture,” he said.
He uses Scripture throughout the book, but the imaginative perspective is his.
The goal is to encourage readers to return to the source material.
Why Shepherds?
Faith also wants readers to slow down and ask questions that familiarity may have made invisible.
Why were shepherds among the first people called to see the newborn Christ?
Why Bethlehem?
Why the heavenly host?
Why did Herod react so violently?
Why did the family flee to Egypt?
The answers, Faith argues, deepen the story beyond the familiar Christmas-card imagery.
A person can read the same passages for decades and still discover how much theological meaning is packed into a story that has become almost too familiar.
His hope is that The Devil’s Story of Christmas leaves readers curious enough to open the Bible again.
“You’ll read this story differently,” Faith said. “You’ll see Christmas differently.”
Faith Says the Book Is an Entry Point, Not a Replacement for Scripture
Faith described the book as a short, accessible read—134 pages, published September 8, 2026.
He intentionally priced it affordably and designed it to be something a person could read over an afternoon.
The book is available in paperback and digital editions, along with audiobook formats through several platforms.
He also makes supplemental audio material available through his Screwtape Letters podcast website.
But he repeatedly returned to one caution.
The book is not the Bible.
It should lead people toward Scripture, not replace Scripture.
For someone who is uncertain about Christianity, disconnected from church or simply curious about why Christmas matters, Faith hopes the book creates a doorway.
His ideal outcome would be hearing that someone came to Christ after reading it.
“That would absolutely have me in tears,” he said.
Winn’s Closing Theme: Taxes, Elections and Faith All Come Back to Responsibility
The subjects could hardly have been more different.
Arizona tax conformity.
Early ballots.
Election vendors.
Christmas.
Spiritual warfare.
Yet Winn found a common thread in all of them.
Responsibility matters.
Government officials should understand the consequences of their decisions.
Election vendors should follow the rules they were hired to follow.
Citizens should educate themselves before voting.
Christians should understand what they believe rather than allowing commercialism or cultural pressure to define it for them.
And people should resist the temptation to hand responsibility for their lives entirely to someone else.
Winn closed with the election only four weeks away and ballots entering the mail.
Her political message was participation.
Her spiritual message was surrender to something larger than politics.
The two are not contradictions.
One asks citizens to do what they can.
The other reminds them they were never in control of everything to begin with.