Slashdot Mirror

They will only keep your money if you don't list a TIN (tax payer ID number) with your merchant account for the reporting to goto the correct places. That is the suggested idea behind the 28% withholding. A TIN number is also your SS number if you havn't applied specifically for a TIN number. Here is a list of what TIN numbers are. I'm not sure how long that link with be valid but simply search for TIN at irs.gov amd you will find the page.

Now if your a legit business and paying your taxes, you already have a TIN number. If your already correctly reporting your income already, then your quarterly estimates won't increase, You will not be out any more money. If and only if, you don't supply a TIN number with your merchant account, the 28% of all transactions will be withheld which would give you a refund for overpayment once you file your normal taxes. Even if your in the 28% bracket, you do not pay a 28% tax on all the money your tax on.

You could do a lot by simply reading the article. I haven't told you anything that isn't in there. You don't need to read the budget to get this information. I have to question if your actually a business owner though. The post that you initially replied to made it clear about the TIN number issue being a requisite for the withholding too. Anything called a withholding when dealing with taxes count as a payment for taxes owed and somehow you think you will end up paying something more at the end of the year if you are effected by the withholding.

Even if all your sales are done by credit cards, and you don't provide a TIN number which is also your Social Security Number if your a sole proprietor and failed to request a TIN number when starting your business (or if the government assigned your SSN as the TIN) and you made enough in sales that your in a higher tax bracket then 28% (unlikely for a sole proprietor), you still getting a refund. Lets examine this just so your clear. If you have only credit card receipts as your income source and they equal $160,849.99 with is the highest before entering into the 33% bracket for 2007, that would mean you would have had around $45,000 withheld if you didn't provide a TIN number. You tax obligation would around $39,148 which means roughly $6,000 would have been over payed. But, your sales income isn't what is being taxed here. You still have to account for materials, supplies that otherwise would consist of being a cost of business, rent, utilities, electric, payroll and so on. Your also reporting this on your personal income taxes so you have personal deductions like mortgage interest, head of household and so on. So let's say you have a 50% profit margin after everything is considered except your personal deductions for your company which is extremely high, You taxable income is now around $75,424 which places you in the 25% tax bracket owing about $15,234 in taxes. That would be almost $29,766 in over payment giving you a refund.

The bottom line is either provide a TIN number for your merchant account or get a refund. This is pretty much no different then getting a 1099 for contract work somewhere. You would still have cost sourcing and all to consider before being liable for taxes. What you won't be able to do is avoid claiming a sale made by a credit card as income. I suspect that this will effect online businesses who aren't even reporting income related activities or are severely underreporting them the most.

I know TIN number is somewhat redundant but the TIN has become an object or noun as a whole which seems to make sense to continue specifying it is a number even though the N stands for number.

Okay, honestly - I'm not seeing the problem here. The article states that the data would be tied to the main taxpayer ID listed for the company. It also states that many Mom and Pop shops forgo using a taxpayer ID and instead use the Social Security Number of the primary owner.

So the problem as I see it is there are a whole lot of incredibly lazy business owners that did not incorporate their businesses correctly. If their business is incorporated, it protects them from a whole lot of lawsuits and problems. It also took me a whole five minutes to find an online form that you can submit for an employer identification number which I believe can be used for tax purposes. The IRS site claims that it takes a couple minutes to apply and you receive your EIN electronically and can begin using it immediately. Ergo, no more social security number problems.

So why would have a credit card company store a database (which I really hope they have anyway so they can charge/make their own money) that matches up receipts with my taxpayer ID a problem? We can't help those who don't help themselves and get a taxpayer ID.

The other point is of course that if the US didn't spend more on the military than every single other country in the world...

...those other countries would have to quit slacking off and pony up for their own defense.

Fixed that for you. Right now, they're getting a free ride at our expense. It's how they can afford their massive-welfare-state lifestyle.

(BTW, so-called "entitlement" programs account for over 50% more in federal spending than defense.)

Generally, in the US you cannot claim time as a charitable contribution.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p526.pdf

The poster meant the settlements the RIAA gets which do not have dubious legality. They are of course taxable and the poster is an idiot but that's another matter.

Correct, an illegal immigrant is not a citizen, by definition. The previous poster did not say "illegal immigrant" though. When I was an H1B (non-immigrant) visa holder. I had to pay US taxes. I was a _temporary_ resident, but still subject to US taxes, as mentioned above, without representation.

In fact, you can even be taxed by the US as a _non-resident_ alien, if the company you work for is a US company. (One of the reason KBR's subsidiary that controls payroll for workers in Iraq is headquartered in the caribbean)

Note also, that the US government taxes your _worldwide_ income, not just your US income, although there are strange exceptions and other rules.

IRS page about taxing aliens

So as mentioned above, non-citizens can be taxed. We knew you were talking about "residents", but your statement was incorrect.

Some states even tax non-residents. If, for instance, you live in NJ, but work in NY, you may have to pay NY taxes.

Wow... I guess you might be beyond conceded and into the convinced territory if your willing to just dismiss something you don't agree with as a troll. Perhaps that is the problem with politics in America in general. It would seem that no matter how wrong or right you mihgt be, as long as you want something, to hall with everything else.

I made some observations, presented them, provided some information the with minimal work on your behalf could validate it. It is entirely up to you if you want to keep an open mind and take a look or shut everything out but it does not make my posts a troll.

A lot of things have happened since yesterday when I posted that reply that pertain specifically to the reply. Obama for instance has attempted to distance himself from the Right wing talking points that some on the left were saying too. He said that he was apauled by some recent comments the reverend wright made and he obviously didn't know him like he thought he did. He also said that if the reverend thinks HE (obama) supports what he said, that the reverend obviously didn't know Obama either. This indicates to me at least, that is was more then just a right wing talking point because of the political back tracking done.

As for feeling sorry for me, you don't have to and I never asked you to. That is life and what we have to deal with. That story isn't unusual either, mine deals with farms which I still work, they have changed some things around dealing specifically with a farm because people were having to sell them to cover the death taxes. But the problem is, that this isn't unusual in any other related scenario. You want to pick and arbitrary value and complain that someone got a break when you have no idea about what they do when valuating the property to assess the taxes.

I suggest that you learn a little more about the situation before you go repeating some liberal talking point about how the rich are getting away with murder. I learned my lesson by having to live through it. there are plenty of other people who have done the exact same thing. When you die, if you have a house that you purchased today at lets say a modest $120,000 and live another 30 years then give the house to your first born child or brother as an inheritance. The assessed value after 30 years in the future assuming you kept the maintenance up and your community hasn't become blighted might be worth $200-250,000. Now let assume that you have a car valued at $30,000 plus lawn care equipment at about $5000 and maybe some computer gear valued at around $3000. Worst case scenario is that your estate can be assessed at a value of $288,000 that without the 2 million exemption and new estate tax rates would put you in the 45% maximum federal bracket for tax valuations. Your dependent would have to come up with somewhere around $130,000 to keep your inheritance and this doesn't include any investment money or retirement money you might have. With the new rates, you have a 2 million exemption which would negate most of the federal taxes on that property but if you got rid of the exemption, your estate would have to pay $2,701.00 plus 35% of anything over $10,450. This would bring your tax liability to around $99000-$100,000 for federal liability alone.

I don't think you understand who the death tax breaks help the most. Sure it will help some rich people, but it helps you and me more. I wouldn't consider either one of us to be rich by any stretch of the word under the scenario I laid out. BTW, it wouldn't matter how many dependents you spread that across, the tax is on the estate of the deceased before it get allocated to beneficiaries of your will or probate. You may be young, renting, with little to no money. It shouldn't always be that way though and it may effect you or someone you know who is willing to leave you something after their death. And god forbid that we happen to be in another inflated market situation where your property is hyper inflated an

Do the math. In the most current complete year, 2005, we have taxable income - which is basically the government's way of saying gross income it can tax - is $5,137,165,874,000. Then, scroll over to the Total Tax Payments line item: $1,083,700,046,000.

$1,083,700,046,000 / $5,137,165,874,000 = ~21%

This number assumes no credits and dealing with the economic impact that comes from not giving preferencial tax treatment for companies paying foreign taxes, child care, elderly & disabled, education, retirement savings, children, etc. Any additional will drive up the effective flat rate. The problem is the math doesn't work out, and most people that favor flat taxes have never bothered to look at the numbers. If 21% is the lowest rate you can get to replace existing revenues and it would do so by shifting the tax burden to the poor - which will likely have many macro-economic effects such as taxing demand for goods out of the economy. So, we have the problem that the tax rate isn't anywhere near where you say it will be and that this system will have many effects that you don't understand.

And if you are going to conduct wars in Iraq and elsewhere, that are estimated to cost more than all of the tax that is collected in a single year, then you have additional issues driving up government expense that ultimately need to be covered by taxes.

They can Tax-Exempt Status for Your Organization will get you pointed in the correct direction, I look forward to the latest congregation of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster

Nearly everyone is expected to pay taxes, but there are people who cheat and pay less than what they owe. It's illegal, no matter how you feel about paying taxes and what the government does with your money. The government believes that tax cheats hurt everyone and encourages you to report tax evasion. Read on to learn more. Instructions Difficulty: Moderately Easy Steps 1 Step One Collect information. Get as many details as you can about the company or person you suspect of tax evasion, including names, addresses and tax number. Be prepared to explain why you believe there is fraud involved, how many years it's been happening, and how much money the suspected person or company may have failed to report. 2 Step Two File a form. The Internal Revenue Service, many states and some local taxing authorities have a website to report tax evasion. They will ask for as much information as you can provide about the situation. 3 Step Three Send a letter. Write down the information and put it in a letter to the IRS or other tax agency. You can also obtain a copy of the form they use, fill it out and mail (or fax) it to them. 4 Step Four Call in a tip. Check the phone listings for your local IRS or state taxation department, and call to report tax evasion. Many agencies even have a special hotline for your tip. Again, have as much information about the person or company and details of the suspected tax evasion as possible when you call. 5 Step Five Decide if you want to be anonymous. Most agencies encourage you to identify yourself when you report tax evasion, but they don't require it. The IRS offers to protect your identity. It may give you a reward for your tip. Not all taxing authorities offer rewards. 6 Step Six Be prepared to hear nothing more. Although they may acknowledge your report, most agencies have no requirement to give you updates on their investigation. Some places use confidentiality laws to avoid releasing any kind of progress reports. Then go here http://www.irs.gov/individuals/article/0,,id=106778,00.html http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f3949a.pdf )You may fill out Form 3949-A online, print it and mail it to: Internal Revenue Service Fresno, CA 93888 If you do not wish to use Form 3949-A, you may send a letter to the address above. Please include the following information, if available: * Name and address of the person you are reporting * The taxpayer identification number (social security number for an individual or employer identification number for a business) * A brief description of the alleged violation, including how you became aware of or obtained the information * The years involved * The estimated dollar amount of any unreported income * Your name, address and daytime telephone number Although you are not required to identify yourself, it is helpful to do so. Your identity can be kept confidential. Frequently Asked Questions - 1.13 IRS Procedures: Reporting Fraud How to Report Abusive Tax Promotions and/or Promoters: Complete the referral form which documents the information necessary to report an abusive tax avoidance scheme. The form can be mailed or faxed to the IRS address and fax number on the form. How to Report Abusive CPAs, Attorneys or Enrolled Agents: Report suspicious actions by tax professionals to the email address of the IRS Office of Professional Responsibility. Things we know. Name: Keith W. Kimmel Current state residing in : Oklahoma Former states include Michigan and Indiana Phone numbers he used online in the past (405) 329-0600 (206) 666.6133 Websites he owns or has owned. Indianaspam.com kkbuys.com unitedpackagesmashers.com laportesucks.com sitciot.com fucknationalcity.com fucksbc.net ameritechlies.com 4noc.com Amcstuff.com Aoae.org Aoae.us Boycottgeneralmotors.com Boycottonstar.com Bscourier.com Decaybuffet.com Denofdarkness.com Dontbuygm.com Eternalnap.com Gmprivacy.com Goddamnit.us Godlie.us Houseofsurplus.com

I assume you have to collect the 6% tax yourself and pay it to the state quarterly, like you would do for sales tax as any other business... thing is you need a federal employee ID number to do that...

The federal number you're thinking of is an employer identification; you don't need one to file sales taxes. You only need one if you have employees, or if you form a corporation or partnership, or in a few other special cases.

What would you like to know? Theoretically, the finer details of our security are "official use only" and I can be jailed for revealing them. Specifically, our security workflows are considered secret and can't be discussed. However, the broad strokes are already public knowledge.

With that in mind, I can go for the following: We use a standard WinXP image, BlackIce on every machine (this only pertains to user machines, not servers), Symantec AV, WinMagic for our full disk encryption, Cisco VPN client software, have a pretty big commitment to Tivoli for all the things it does, ... The list is pretty long.

Anything in particular interest you?

You want Kevin Mitnick to determine the next election? (no, not THAT Mitnik, I mean the Russian guy) Hmmph, I guess it's no worse than having Sony and BP's bribes; excuse me, "campaign contributions" determine it.

I'm amazed that anyone here would trust their vote about ANYTHING on the internet.

But the referendum Idea is one I'd go along with. There's no reason any law has to be passed RIGHT NOW; we could vote every year. I'd have the same way we do it now; a bill passes the house and Senate, then is vetoed by the President. Only I'd add another step, and give we, the people a chance to veto it as well if he let it become law. You'd need a Constitutional Amendment to do this, though.

I'd also have all laws automatically repealed after a set amount of time, say 5 years. Good laws would have little trouble being passed again, while crap like the telephone tax would easily die.

Would prohibition have passed if the people could have vetoed it? How about marijuana prohibition? I'd be willing to bet that one would have died in th '70s if there were term limits to laws.

To be tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, an organization must be organized and operated exclusively for exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3), and none of its earnings may inure to any private shareholder or individual. In addition, it may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates.

from http://www.irs.gov/charities/charitable/article/0,,id=96099,00.html.

I found myself googling this, so thought I would share with potential bidders.

Short version: you might have a hard time deducting any money you spend on this charity auction, unless you can show the amount you paid was purposely above fair market value -- according to The IRS. I'm not sure how you'd come up with a 'fair market value' for e.g. an @slashdot.org email address.. but I guess it could be done.

Cheers and happy bidding, remember it's for a good cause

$5.85/hr for 40hrs/wk (which a lot of people are lucky to get; most places cut you off at 36) is $234/wk, $936/mo, $12,168/yr. Taxes are about 15% at that wage, so you're looking at $10k per year. Nobody really lives on that; it's minimal survival, especially for a 'first-world' country. Housing and food costs vary wildly, but you can expect to pay about 80% of your after-tax income on basic needs (shelter, food, cheap clothes, electricity). Note that this doesn't include medical insurance, car insurance, gas, or any form of entertainment. Offering credit to someone in this situation is almost criminal, because it's quite likely they won't be able to keep up with it. One bounced check, late payment, or short paycheck, and they're screwed more thoroughly than a porn star; the fees and interest quickly outstrip their available income.
Construction and manual labor is more like $8-$10/hr, more for trades like pipefitters, electricians, etc.
A white-collar service job might net you $9-$15/hr. Specialists could see $25/hr or more, after 4+ additional years of training and certification, plus relevant experience.
Basically, unless you put yourself into nearly lifelong debt for a degree (and manage to choose a good one), you're capped at about three times the poverty level unless you get a decade of experience or move into management/business ownership. Any opportunity beyond $12-$13/hr is pretty rare, and either physically or mentally punishing. (major exceptions are administration and government/military contract work) Another thing to consider is that once you move past $20k/yr, your taxes rise from 15% up to around 22%. Additionally, locations with moderate to high pay rates have correspondingly high costs of living. There are cities in the US where a McDonald's employee makes over $10/hr to start; unfortunately, almost everything is 2-2.5x more expensive, which leaves them worse off once increased taxes are factored in.

For more economic details, have a look at the census bureau, http://www.census.gov/. Latest data is from 2000.
If you want to know more about our tax system, have a look at the ever-dreaded IRS here: http://www.irs.gov/.

"You can leave, but not with your money."

Except you can, and this point is bullshit.


Oh, really??? Try googling "irs 8854"

Here, let me help you out.

http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/international/article/0,,id=97245,00.html

And this is today. The working theory with these people is the Boiling frog syndrome.

The first statement is false. For tax year 2007, the personal exemption is $3400 and the standard deduction is $5350 for single filers. Thus, at least the first $8750 of income is effectively exempt from taxation. Your other two statements are correct, but in my personal experience it's unusual for TA/RA stipends to approach that amount.

The stipend is same for everyone and is advertised on the department website.

Yes, and if we're talking about universities that were anything like the one I attended, they're much less than $8750 a year - for everyone.

No they are not exempt!

In fact, stipends *are* exempt from Social Security taxes, provided that one works fewer than 20 hours a week, and only while regular classes are in session. See, for example, http://www.housing.wisc.edu/jobs/PDF/payroll_information.pdf. And for a canonical reference that applies specifically to nonresident aliens on student visas, see http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/international/article/0,,id=131635,00.html.

I know we've gone pretty far off topic here, but there is one point I'd like to make. Here in the US at least, no one really knows what their true tax burden is. There are a number of reasons for this, but I think the most overlooked one is the way taxes roll down hill. That is, things that you buy, apart from any explicit tax applicable for that good or service, has a built in tax as well. Corporations who sell goods and services generally try to do so at a profit. If they do, the "corporate tax" they owe isn't picked up by the corporation, it's passed on to the consumer. Just as when a renter pays the property tax with each rent check they make, so do folks who buy a widget pay the "corporate tax" for selling that widget. Corporations also pay taxes on behalf of the people they employ which is either passed on to consumers or to the employee (most likely both).

There are a thousand ways each dollar you earn is taxed in a myriad of subtle ways. Most countries, I imagine, work the same way. My point here is that how can anyone say they are satisfied with the tax they pay (and by proxy the government services they receive) unless they have a full understanding of what their true tax burden is - in fact no one can make this judgment without tax transparency.

Like I said above, I have no idea what my true tax burden is, but I'd be surprised if I didn't pay more than 60 cents for every dollar I earn directly to the government.

what corporation actually makes use of forms?

Oh, I don't know. This company I work with every year to file taxes uses PDFs which you can download then complete. Perhaps you've heard of them? They're called the IRS.

http://www.irs.gov/formspubs/lists/0,,id=97817,00.html

My State & City also have PDF forms online that you can complete.

I was astounded to find that you are right. Federal tax in Canada caps out at 29% http://www.taxtips.ca/fedtax.htm Where the United States caps out at 35%http://www.irs.gov/formspubs/article/0,,id=164272,00.html. One could probubly make an argument that the US federal rates are lower for low income, but there is no doubt that they are higher overall.

Sales tax may be a diffrent story however. The rates in Canada range from 6% in one province, to 13%-16.6% in all the others. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provincial_Sales_Tax I have never seen a US sales tax rate over 7% http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sales_taxes_in_the_United_States

In any event I thank you for pointing out the Federal rate difference.

This is interesting point since the average Canadian only paid 11.18% in income taxes in 2002 http://www.taxtips.ca/statistics.htm, while the average American paid 13.5% the same year http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/02in01tr.xls.

Of course this doesn't account for all the other forms of taxation, but still Americans pay a higher income taxes but still have yearly budget deficits.

It's hard to keep our (American) current political situation out of it, but which is more important affordable healthcare for all or seemingly cheaper oil prices and the occupation of foreign nations?

This article is replete with comments which assume that people who take items at gunpoint are desperate drug addicts of low intelligence. The association of force or the threat of force with paucity of wit is probably a manifestation of the poster's insecurity: a man stealing a laptop is likely the grunt input end of an organised fence->reburb->resell operation, just as the average programmer is the grunt input end of some business process.

Except that, as you imply, the highwayman is going to have to "become an expert pretty quickly" to avoid not just being caught, but the lethal force of retaliation; the worst a cubicle dweller has to fear is an embarrassing bug uncovered in testing. It's the kind of epic misunderstanding that leads to calling a suicide bomber "cowardly" - of all criticisms you could possibly bestow on a man who has decided that the best way to tackle some problem involves sacrificing his own life, cowardice is the least accurate.

Lets keep it in perspective. NASA's FY 2007 budge was about $17.310 Billion out of a $2.8 trillion total budget. That means that NASA represents about 0.6% of the federal budge. Compare this to the $699 billion defense budge or even the $27 billion expended for agriculture, and you can see where our priorities lie. There were about 133 million individual tax returns filed last year. Therefore On a per individual tax payer basis, NASA's budget represents a cost average of about $130 per individual taxpayer (not including corporations) per year. Compare this to the defense budget to works out to about $5,250/year.

> Paying $75000 in federal taxes equates to making somewhere around $300000-500000 in gross
> income

The low end of that, yeah. For 2007, per http://www.irs.gov/formspubs/article/0,,id=164272, 00.html you pay "$39,148.75 plus 33% of the amount over 160,850" as long as you earn less than $349,700. That means that to hit $75,000 tax your taxable income needs to be about $270000.

The gross would be higher, of course. But in that range, the difference is pretty slim. For example, in 2006 personal exemptions start to phase out once your gross is over 150,500 and are gone completely when your gross is at 273,000. That's if you're single. If you're married those numbers are higher by about $40,000. Similarly, most deductions phase out starting at a gross of $156,000 or so. See http://www.taxguideonline.com/ContentPages/ID_Phas eOut.html for some more numbers.

And as you said, that excludes FICA (medicare & social security), etc. Those add at least $6,000 to your tax burden once you're over $80,000 or so gross income (even ignoring the employer half). So really, you need only $250,000 taxable income to easily hit $75,000 in federal tax.

Where I work, the servers are encrypted. The laptops are encrypted. The desktops are about to be encrypted.

No disk is ever RMA'd anywhere. If we have a failure, we get a new replacement disk and send back a sheet of paper saying we destroyed the old one.

We wipe sensitive data with 7 random overwrites on all disks in storage that may be used again. Working desktop and laptop disks passing out of the organization for donation to schools or charities get the same treatment.

Dead disk drives from laptops and desktops are treated just like server disks. Server disks at end of life are never passed out of the organization in working condition. They are software-wiped as above, degaussed in a gigantic noisy machine, disassembled, and the platters removed. Glass platters are broken into little bits and thrown out. Metal platters are beaten up with a hammer and then (I am not kidding) a guy in the office makes sculptures out of them. We have an area with various towering sculptures representing literally thousands of decommissioned disks, some of which are really heavy 8-inch platters made, it appears, of copper. I guess that means we've been doing this for a long time.

The sculpture procedure is optional and specific to my local office. :-) At that point, our official procedures clear us to sell the platters by simply pitching them in amongst the other miscellaneous tons of broken equipment we periodically sell off as scrap.

Opinions? Good enough?

I'm surprised. The Wikimedia Foundation doesn't have serious legal problems. They need an intellectual property lawyer on tap, but most of their stuff is routine.

They may need a tax guy. With Jimbo Wales involved in both the profit-making Wikia and the nonprofit Wikimedia, there are issues with IRS nonprofit status for Wikimedia. (See Instructions for IRS form 1023, line 5A).

Wikia is turning into a popular culture/fan system; they have the Star Wars wiki and various other fan sites. One could argue that it would be to the advantage of Wikipedia to export all the popular culture stuff to Wikia, and focus Wikipedia on more encyclopedic subjects. But that's an asset of Wikipedia; if sold off to Wikia, money should flow the other way. Without an arms-length relationship between the two, there are serious tax issues.

Okay, people keep saying this ... but when I report my "drug sales" net income (after amortizing my .45 and deducting bribes), won't they just turn that right around and charge you with a crime, implicitly requiring you to waive the fifth?

They can't directly charge you with a crime AFAIK, though perhaps they might be able to if you did something really boneheaded, like write "illegal drug sales" in the "type of business" section of your tax return.

However, your tax returns can be used as evidence against you in a criminal case. If the police suspect you might be selling drugs, they can acquire your tax records. If those tax records show exorbitant income for your professed job, that could be used as evidence sufficient to acquire a search warrant, and then you're boned. Certain types of transactions have to be reported and made available to law enforcement agencies as well. The question for the criminal then becomes a risk analysis: is it safer to conceal the income from the IRS, or report it and hope it's sufficiently hidden or justifiable?

This page describes some of the IRS' activities in narcotics enforcement.

According to the IRS, yes they do tax illegal activity. They just want your money... who cares where it came from! =)

You can see it here:
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p525.pdf

Go down to page 28 under the section titled "Other Income". There's all sorts of funny stuff there like bribes, kickbacks, and illegal income (where they specifically mention selling illegal drugs). They figure that nobody actually reads the instructions that come with the 1040 forms. I guess I'm just obsessive-compulsive about filling out forms correctly. =)

The economy is great if you are rich- the economy is terrible if you are not rich. the fact of the matter is that I am working twice as long for 30k less than I was 10 years ago in a higher level job.

ECON 101: Free Market.

There's always some punk fresh out of school or some genius fresh off retirement that thinks he/she can do your job better (or he/she can actually do it better), faster, more efficiently, more cheaply, etc. You either gotta step up or stand aside and cry about it. It will never get better. Suck it up.

Seems kinda hypocritical that you would whine about rich folks, when in fact, you would probably like to have excess wealth yourself. Who wants to be poor? Would you haggle for a higher price at a car dealer? Do you think it would be better to pay $20 for a head of broccoli? Why should your employer? They obviously can get the talent for less money and it has nothing to do with the economy at large. The pool of talent has increased and you're being phased out.

You get what you can or you get out of the market.

And, I'm not sure what you would call rich. If (Federal) taxes were the only consideration, I would have no motivation to earn more. The more I make, the more I'm taxed.

Send me 10% of your income and I'll send you glowingly positive propaganda about the success of socialism.

By the way, it doesn't matter who's in the White House. It really doesn't. You can figure out how to work the system to your advantage either way. Democrats do things a certain way...work their system. Republicans do things a certain way...work their system. Politics is just a machine.

The IRS now taxes cell phones issued to you by your employer. If they tax cell phones, why not this? Dosen't your wife want to know where you are?

"Mexifornia" as you said, is the first time i've ever heard that word. Unlike any canadian territory where french nor english was the native language, "Spanish" - the american variation of Spain's official language, was already present in California and many other "western states" long before the US moved west.

There's a book on immigration by Victor Davis Hanson of that name. Hanson is a brilliant military historian, and also a California farmer (small family farm) who has had a lot of personal contact with illegal immigrants. His book is a sympathetic but worried look at the phenomenon.

The Spanish were no more the original inhabitants of California than the French were of Quebec. The difference is that Quebec became part of Canada as a French-speaking province, whereas even in the early days of the territory of California, it was primarily English-speaking. Latin Americans whose ancestors were in California in the early days have long since assimilated.

What are people so afraid of? Surely no one on /. is going to be out of work mowing lawns... [ snip ] If anything, we should be trying to give these peoples more jobs because they'll do it, try to do it well and hopefully "motivate" locals who don't do the jobs back because they can't get hired for anything more skilled and aren't willing to take less pay now.

Nobody on /. is going to be out of work, sure, but that's not what this is about. It's not good to have lower class citizens put out of work by illegal immigration--unemployment can lead to poverty, violence, and social breakdown.

They want to be able to come here, and live like they "imagine" they can. So when everyone who thinks "they MUST assimilate but don't..." they are wrong. No one who comes here sets up show like vietnam, thailan, japan, russia, pakistan or any other place. They can try to "live like they did at home" but that doesn't mean buying a property, tearing it down, and the building the same crappy structure they had back home.

First of all, sometimes people do come here from all sorts of places and try to "live like they did at home"; ever heard of Chinatown, Little Korea, Little Italy? With those examples, people usually do assimilate after a generation or so, but there are signs that's not happening with some Latin American sub-populations. Another big difference with many of the illegal immigrants from Latin America--they don't plan on staying or integrating, and are just here to make money to send home. They often do end up staying, but they keep a romanticized image of their home country and never really cut ties. This hinders the assimilation process.

You know, i've personally never have heard of an illegal alien getting welfare, foodstamps or some other sort of non-humane benefit.

You've heard of ESL classes, right? Those are expensive.

I've never heard of one apply for a tax refund either. I'm sure they've gotten emergency room treatment for free at the expense of legal aliens, but standing in line to get money? They must have paid a lot of $ to get a good SSN and ID.

I doubt they go around talking about their fraudulent IDs too much. A lot probably get paid under the table tax free in the first place, with the ones who do have good fake IDs are perfectly free to file for a tax refund. You know that if you somehow don't qualify for an SSN (i.e., you're here illegally), the IRS is happy to let your pay your taxes using an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number?

You don't see Los Angeles being a copy of Mexico. And besides, like i've told everyone after having worked in TJ for a little bit, "the only difference i saw between TJ and California is that California has Cal Trans."

So it's not a copy, but the only difference is Cal Trans? I don't get it.

Anyhow, it's time for leftovers from "Beto's." Man those dudes can make some mean fajitas. I

How the hell do you "sell" currency? The only entity that can do that is the Federal Reserve, selling notes that cost five or ten cents to make for face value. For everything else in the US, it's just an exchange.

Person A gives a $5 bill to Person B in exchange for five $1 bills. Who has profitted? Nobody...it's a "like kind exchange" and obvious to anyone older than five. And yet, the IRS wants to be the sole agent for determining what is a "like kind exchange". Trading a large swamp for a small forest of equal "value"? Exchange. Trading a male cow for a female cow? Taxable. I pay $250/mo for my own medical insurance and my employer pays me $250/mo to reimburse me. Is that taxable income or a tax-free exchange? In order to know, I would have to slog through something like this:

http://www.irs.gov/irb/2005-16_IRB/ar08.html

What about trading $5 for 2.5 British pounds? Income or like-kind exchange? And now finally...trading $5 for 500 virtual coins. You make the statement unlike Monopoly money, you can sell virtual currency for real money" ...wrong. If I'm playing a hotly contested game and the other player offers me $5 for 500 Monopoly bucks, then I'm doing just that. I've personally never played such a competitive Monopoly but then I probably wouldn't be paying real money to advance in WoW either.

That's my point...trading "real world" value for "virtual world" value is still just an exchange. If anything, it should be handled like any other currency exchange. And that raises the completely legitimate question of how I can trade $5 for $5 but not a hour for $5. According to the IRS, that's not an exchange and that's why it should be taxed...but there are a lot of people who disagree. After all, my time is a lot more finite than virtual gold, so if I trade my time (labor) for its equivalent value, that's an exchange.

The problem is that in all exchanges, the IRS will recognize any gain, but will never recognise a loss. Which means that if I trade property worth $10000 for property worth $20000, then I've "gained" $10000 and am taxed on that amount but the poor unlucky sap who agreed to that trade doesn't get to deduct his $10000 "loss". And that's why it's completely bogus. Someone has invented a new form of currency, and the IRS wants to recognize that any time someone trades it for US bank notes they have "gained" income and owe tax...BUT they refuse to equally recognize that any time someone provides the new form of currency (or the labor behind creating it) they have "lost" an equal or equivalent income.

So unfortunately, your idea for a tax shelter fails for that reason. They will recognize any gains and refuse any losses. Even the five-year-old would realize that's a rigged system. And so that, to me, is further evidence that calls into question the basis of the current income tax system.

-JoeShmoe
.

When you can figure out an economic system where government programs aren't funded by taxes, and government workers don't get paid by taxes, and when it's shown to work better than, say, anarchy, we can come back to this discussion. Until then it's just you bitching meaninglessly, all the while taking for granted every service that taxes pay for. Sure, much revenue from taxes is misused, but much of it *isn't.*

That system exists. It is called capitalism. It worked great for the first decades of U.S. history and can work again... in theory AND in practice. Taxes were non existent or much less in earlier history. There was no *constitutional* federal income tax until the 16th amendment (passed in 1913), and that was only 1-7% (1913 1040 form).

For pragmatic reasons tax funded services are bad (nearly all of them can be much more efficaciously be provided by the free market) and for moral reasons taxes are bad (anyway you want to cut it taxation IS slavery).

Realistically you do idle a lot. Red lights, idiot drivers, and traffic, and you're spending a lot of time idling. Not idling is not realistic. Even on highways you have some idling time, between dallas/houston(abt 4 hrs to 5 hrs) I idle about 30-45 minutes because of traffic and construction, and that's between the cities, where you can have even more traffic depending on what time. Traffic sucks, but it's a part of life. And yes, if you know how to drive a hybrid, you'll get mileage over what the EPA currently says(and drastically that over what it will say soon).

And with the tax credits (I think ending this year or ended) it's been typically cost effective depending on what type of hybrid you get. A civic hybrid from last year would have paid for itself within 8 months with my level of driving, a 3000 premium over regular civics with 2000-2500(I forget where it was last year) back from the gov't means a difference of 500-1000 to make up, which is pretty easy with how gas prices went last summer.

I hate these people who run the numbers and leave out other numbers. Tax Credits on IRS page

Yeah, they aren't guaranteed, but if you buy early you can get them pretty easily. Or who say "Batteries are expensive" when they have very long warranties that cover it. If you want to pretend to know what you're talking about, then do the proper research. If you want the most cost effective vehicle, gas wise, get a bike. You have to be comfortable with your car, hybrid or not, and if you don't like them don't get them. But don't make up fake reasons.

http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc506.html

Where are your numbers coming from? The IRS keeps a large number of statistics publicly available but I haven't been able to find a document that verifies or contradicts what you stated yet (there's a large number of tables available). Also, an increase in revenue is irrelevant if it doesn't keep up with expenditures. Inflation also needs to be considered.

He's not saying that the top ten percent of income earners pay seventy percent of their income in taxes; he's saying that seventy percent of the tax revenue is provided by that top ten percent, which I'd like to see a reference for.

It's closer to 66% now (data compiled from this spreadsheet from the IRS), but the larger point still stands. The top 1% pays more than a third of the total tax bill, the top 5% pays over half, and the top 50% pays over 96%. The other half of the population is, for all practical purposes, getting a free ride.

REALLY? Because the 2006 tax rates would disagree with you.. http://www.irs.gov/formspubs/article/0,,id=150856, 00.html

You pay 35% max over 350,000, for those 10% who make 1,000,000 or more a year this is 7% more than what i make at 70k.

Not to mention all of the tax shelters that they have available to them that are completely out of my league as a wage earner.

How did you get around the Underpayment Penalty? http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc306.html

You are incorrect. The IRS has a section of their website dedicated to debunking these sorts of claims:

http://www.irs.gov/taxpros/article/0,,id=159932,00 .html

I believe you will find reference to 5 different cases that disprove your assertion.

Actually, strangely enough, the deadline was April 17 this year.

Here in the States, if you go to IRS.GOV, the very first link on the page is to the "free e-file" info (http://www.irs.gov/efile/article/0,,id=118986,00. html) or you can go directly to http://www.irs.gov/app/freeFile/jsp/index.jsp?ck.

Generally if you made under $52k you can get free federal tax-prep and efiling, and about half the states are in on the free prep/efile thing too. Some companies have restrictions based on your age, why I have no idea.

Note: you MUST go from the IRS site to the free efiling site to get the cheap/free rate. If you just go directly to the tax-prep site without going to IRS.GOV first, some will charge you the full regular price.

Please tell us where you do your banking. The IRS pays 8% interest. I'd like to see a savings account that pays better than that crappy rate.

http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=168552,0 0.html

Wrong.

"If you are a U.S. citizen or resident alien, whether you must file a federal income tax return depends upon your gross income, your filing status, your age, and whether you are a dependent. For details, see Table 1 and Table 2. You also must file if one of the situations described in Table 3 applies. The filing requirements apply even if you owe no tax." says the IRS.

As long as they owe you a refund, nothing bad happens if you file a day late.

My gut reaction was that you still have to file on time. But, I stand corrected and I think you for the information.

R-2007-89, April 16, 2007 WASHINGTON -- Victims of the major storm affecting several Northeastern states on Monday, April 16 will have two additional days to file their tax returns beyond the April 17 tax deadline, the Internal Revenue Service announced today. Taxpayers directly impacted by the storm have until midnight April 19 to meet their tax filing obligations without incurring late filing and payment penalties.