vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
"The only reason taxes are ""needed"" is because the people are to ignorant to know there are better more moral systems out there. For instance instead of stealing hard earned money from people tax the money they spend ie federal sales tax. ""How is that any different?!"" Because a sales tax isn't theft it just raises the price of products you want to buy, this way there is no tax dodging and no imprisonment for keeping what you earned and what is rightfully yours"
You could, for example, claim a GST/HST credit even with no income. Now, if you receive any income at all, you are going to have to pay taxes, which means you are obligated to file a tax return. If sufficient taxes were deducted from your paycheque, you are still obligated to file a tax return. However, you will not have to pay penalties if you file late, even if you file very late, at least not until the CRA sends you a request to file. But be aware, you won't likely be able to tell if you owe the CRA money until you do your taxes, and if you do end up owing, there are substantial penalties for filing late. In general, I'd strongly advise filing your tax return in almost all circumstances.
Ordinary taxpayers have to go through a lot of stress figuring out forms and lining up to pay their tax. Perhaps, a more convenient way can be implemented using modern technology and the banking system. If we can pay bills in malls or online now, why cannot tax be paid in the same way? **5. Taxes earmarked for specific purposes must result in direct benefits** Certain taxes, such as gasoline tax for road maintenance, must be dedicated to the particular purpose they were intended based on a direct cost-benefit link. Today, much of the corruption in government circles arise from misappropriating taxes or diverting them from their intended purposes, thus, losing sight of the original intent of the tax. What can the taxpayer do to prevent these things from happening? Aside from joining protest rallies or talking to your congress representative, you can actually form or join small groups that could create awareness among people through the media or Internet. This is already being done on Facebook and Twitter. How effective it is may be hard to measure; but time will come when a critical mass of concerned people will have a force of a virtual army that can change the tide of events in a society. Inevitable as taxes may be, enjoying their ultimate benefits can be a much better motivation that spending our time looking for ways to avoid them.
"Not sure I understood, so I'll summarize what I think I read: You got scholarship X, paid tuition Y < X, and you got 1098T to report these numbers. You're asking whether you need to pay taxes on (X-Y) that you end up with as income. The answer is: of course. You can have even lower tax liability if you don't include the numbers on W2, right? So why doesn't it occur to you to ask ""if I don't include W2 in the software, it comes up with a smaller tax - do I need to include it?""?"
"As a minor you certainly can pay tax, the government wants its cut from you just like everyone else :-) However you do get the personal allowance like everyone else, so you won't have to pay income tax until your net income reaches £10,800 (that's the figure for the tax year from April 2015 to April 2016, it'll probably change in future years). Once you're 16, you will also have to pay national insurance, which is basically another tax, at a lower threshold. The current rates are £2.80/week if you are making £5,965 a year or more, and also 9% on any income above £8,060 (up to £42,385). Your ""net income"" or ""profits"" are the income you receive minus the expenses you have to support that income. Note that the expenses must be entirely for the ""business"", they can't be for personal things. The most important thing to do immediately is to start keeping accurate records. Keep a list of the income you receive and also the expenses you pay for hardware etc. Make sure you keep receipts (perhaps just electronic ones) for the expenses so you can prove they existed later. Keep track of that net income as the year goes on and if it starts collecting at the rate you'd have to pay tax and national insurance, then make sure you also put aside enough money to pay for those when the bill comes. There's some good general advice on the Government's website here: https://www.gov.uk/working-for-yourself/what-you-need-to-do In short, as well as keeping records, you should register with the tax office, HMRC, as a ""sole trader"". This should be something that anyone can do whatever their age, but it's worth calling them up as soon as you can to check and find out if there are any other issues. They'll probably want you to send in tax returns containing the details of your income and expenses. If you're making enough money it may be worth paying an accountant to do this for you."
If you have an actual legal entity (legal partnership) that is jointly owned by you and your partner, then the partnership receives the money, and the partnership then sends money to you and your partner. Each of you will pay tax on your share. It's possible that the partnership itself may have to pay taxes. If you are not following that procedure in terms of actual money flow - for example if the royalties are paid into your personal account instead of a partnership account - then you may have trouble convincing the tax authorities that this is the legal situation. If this is a small amount of money then you may be better off just paying the taxes.
There's virtually no way for a person to completely avoid taxation at some point in their lives. Between payroll, sales, excise, and the like, you've been taxed at some point. And whether or not the individual paid is irrelevant to the ownership claim being invalid.
Just as a person who doesn't earn any income can't send the government money, a business that spent more on expenses than it brought in as revenue can't send the government money either. So the tax is on profit. That seems fairer to most people anyway. Things then get even more complicated for both business and personal income taxes because the government uses the system to encourage certain behaviours and to help people facing hard times. If you want to encourage people to get training and move into higher paying jobs, you might make tuition tax deductible. Most countries give a tax deduction for each small child you have. This isn't because people with children use less of the services government provides, is it? Instead it's an acknowledgement that people with children generally have less money to spend. Or an encouragement to have children, or something. Tax motivations are complicated. If you charged all businesses a flat tax regardless of whether they were making or losing money, people might be hesitant to start companies that lose money at first. There might be less entrepreneurship in that country. If instead you only tax profits, it feels fairer and more people are likely to join in. So that's what most governments do. Is the imaginary business owner who is not turning a profit somehow getting a free ride? They are still paying tax. If they took any salary for themselves, there was personal income tax on that. Everything the company bought, it paid sales tax on. There may have been excise taxes and such in other things they bought. The economic activity of the business has been driving the wheel of the local economy and spinning off some taxes at various levels that whole time. Whether the business itself is chipping in some corporate income tax too may not end up being particularly relevant. Example: a sole proprietor has revenue of $100,000 and spends $10,000 on supplies and such. If the salary to the owner is $89,000 the company has a $1000 profit which it pays tax on. If the salary to the owner is $91,000 the company has a $1000 loss and doesn't pay tax (and may be able to use the loss to reduce taxes in a future year.) So what?
If corporations are people, why do persons have to pay tax on their revenues (personal income) while corporations only pay tax on their profits (operating income).   If corporations are people, then everyone should pay taxes the same way - either on their revenues, or their profits. We shouldn't be discriminating.   Boy, if a person could only pay taxes on their profits (savings), instead of their revenues (personal income), it'd be a whole new ballgame.
Call it whatever you like.  There ate places you can go which have no government taxes... mostly because they have no government and there is no social services.  They are places like Somalia, and regions of Afghanistan.  Sorry, but if yippy ate going to live under the umbrella of three modern world, that comes with an implied cost that we pay or pay the consequences.  The fact that you are using their internet would seem to indicate that you do enjoy the services that are paid for with your taxes.
Well, that's probably not even all of it. If that stranger did his taxes properly, then he already paid about a third of it to the government because wherever he got it from it was income for him and thus it must have been taxed. Now, the remainder is in your hands and yes, according to US law it is now your income and so now you too, must pay about a third of it to the government, and yes you are supposed to explain where it came from. Be careful giving it to somebody else or it'll be taxed yet again. disclaimer: I am not a US citizen
Technically, if you earn in US (being paid there, which means you have a work visa) and live in other country, you must pay taxes in both countries. International treaties try to decrease the double-taxation, and in this case, you may pay in your country the difference of what you have paid in US. ie. your Country is 20% and USA is 15%, you will pay 5%, and vice-versa. This works only with certain areas. You must know the tax legislation of both countries, and I recommend you seek for advisory. This site have all the basic information you need: http://www.irs.gov/Individuals/International-Taxpayers/Foreign-Earned-Income-Exclusion Good luck.
You won't be paying any taxes for income generated in the US as long as you are not-resident in India. You pay US taxes. You can file a null return in India just in case (all zeroes). If you have any income in India - bank deposits in your name, house rental income and so on - that needs to be declared and tax needs to be paid in India.
"The tax system in general, and income tax in particular, is used for several purposes at once. One of those purposes is to raise money to run the government. It isn't the only purpose of income tax, and income tax isn't the only source of money to run the government. Try a thought experiment: let's say it costs $10,000 per person per year to run the government. (It might actually cost far more or far less, that's not the point.) A super simple tax system would just ask each person for $10,000. But such a system isn't fair. Some people don't even earn $10,000 so they are literally not able to pay that. Some people, who earn a lot, can easily afford to pay more. So a still-pretty simple approach asks each person to pay a particular percentage of their income, and the hope is that this will add up to enough to run the government. This still doesn't feel fair to everyone - 10% of your income is hard to find when you're spending it all on rent and food, and easy to find when you have way more than you ""need"". So many countries have what's called a ""progressive"" system of income tax where you pay no tax on the first X of your income, then a small percentage on the next Y, a larger percentage on the next Z and so on. But you asked about business profit. Some places don't tax business profits at all - they just collect income taxes on people once the money reaches them as salary or dividends. Other places do. Just as a person who doesn't earn any income can't send the government money, a business that spent more on expenses than it brought in as revenue can't send the government money either. So the tax is on profit. That seems fairer to most people anyway. Things then get even more complicated for both business and personal income taxes because the government uses the system to encourage certain behaviours and to help people facing hard times. If you want to encourage people to get training and move into higher paying jobs, you might make tuition tax deductible. Most countries give a tax deduction for each small child you have.
"Why does it have to be a central authority?  We collect taxes on local, state, and federal levels.   My question is that we, in the USA are (in my opinion) to fixated on the taxes that rich people might pay and that if we ""anger them"" with higher taxes, they will run away.  Where is the concern for the welfare of the working man and his family?"
You only have to pay income tax on a tax deferred account (like a 401k) when you withdraw money from it. You might only need $3K to live on a month, or less, so you only have to pay the taxes at that time I believe.
One of the reasons, apart from historical, is that different people have different tax liabilities which the employer may not be aware of. For example, in the US we don't pay taxes in source on investment income, and there are many credits and deductions that we can't take. So if I have a child and some interest income from my savings account - employer's withholding will not match my actual tax liability. There are credits for children, additional taxes for the interest, and the actual tax brackets vary based on my marital status and filing options I chose. So even the same family of two people married will pay different amounts in taxes if they chose to file separate tax returns for each, than if they chose to file jointly on one tax return. For anyone who've lived anywhere else, like you and me, this system is ridiculously complex and inefficient, but for Americans - that works. Mainly for the reason of not knowing anything better, and more importantly - not wanting to know.
If you qualify for the safe harbor, you are not required to pay additional quarterly taxes.  Of course, you're still welcome to do so if you're sure you'll owe them; however, you will not be penalized. If your income is over $150k (joint) or $75k (single), your safe harbor is: Estimated tax safe harbor for higher income taxpayers. If your 2014 adjusted gross income was more than $150,000 ($75,000 if you are married filing a separate return), you must pay the smaller of 90% of your expected tax for 2015 or 110% of the tax shown on your 2014 return to avoid an estimated tax penalty. Generally, if you're under that level, the following reasons suggest you will not owe the tax (from the IRS publication 505): The total of your withholding and timely estimated tax payments was at least as much as your 2013 tax. (See Special rules for certain individuals for higher income taxpayers and farmers and fishermen.) The tax balance due on your 2014 return is no more than 10% of your total 2014 tax, and you paid all required estimated tax payments on time. Your total tax for 2014 (defined later) minus your withholding is less than $1,000. You did not have a tax liability for 2013. You did not have any withholding taxes and your current year tax (less any household employment taxes) is less than $1,000. If you paid one-fourth of your last year's taxes (or of 110% of your last-year's taxes) in estimated taxes for each quarter prior to this one, you should be fine as far as penalties go, and can simply add the excess you know you will owe to the next check.
"The Form 1040 (U.S. tax return form) Instructions has a section called ""Do You Have To File?"".  Below a certain income, you are not required to file a tax return and pay any tax.  This amount of income at which you are required to file depends on several things, including your dependency status (you are a dependent of your parents), your marital status, and other factors.  The instructions have charts that show what these numbers are.  You would fall under Chart B. Assuming that you are under age 65, unmarried, and not blind, you only have to file when you reach the following conditions: Your unearned income was over $1,050. Your earned income was over $6,300. Your gross income was more than the larger of— $1,050, or Your earned income (up to $5,950) plus $350. (Note: Income from YouTube would count as ""earned income"" for the purposes above.) However, if you are producing your own videos and receiving revenue from them, you are technically self-employed.  This means that the conditions from Chart C also apply, which state: You must file a return if any of the five conditions below apply for 2015. As a self-employed person, you can deduct business expenses (expenses that you incur in producing your product, which is this case is your videos).  Once your revenue minus your expenses reach $400, you will need to file an income tax return."
What makes you think corporations don't have to pay sales taxes or property taxes (or excise taxes, or environmental impact fees or fuel taxes or any of a million other taxes that we all end up paying) even if they lose money that year?
As Victor says, you pay tax on net profit. If this is a significant source of income for you, you should file quarterly estimated tax payments or you're going to get hit with a penalty at the end of the year.
You appear to just have admitted to tax evasion. You need a lawyer. There's a good chance you don't actually owe any money, but you need legal advice. To be clear, you may well not have been obligated to file tax returns, but you have stated you had some income you didn't report, so there's really nothing else we can say other than recommend you seek legal advice.
You're not paying taxes three times but you are paying three different taxes (or more). Sales tax is a business expense, just like costs of goods sold or interest on a loan.  Then, depending on how you structure the business, the net income of the business just hits you personally and you pay income taxes.  You can work with a tax person to lend some efficiency to this on a long term basis, but it's not like you pay all the taxes against your gross receipts. Whether or not you can make this profitable is a whole different issue.
@gef05 He was making a reference to expatriation and renouncing citizenship. Citizens have to pay taxes wherever they are no matter how long they are there, people that renounce their citizenship have to continue paying income taxes to the US IRS for several years
I get this argument for the citizenship thing too. It's being unpatriotic that I shouldn't want to file or pay taxes on money I earn oustide of the USA that stays in banks outside of the USA and won't be spent in the USA or even ever converted to dollars.  Even if you don't owe anything, it's pretty much impossible to file without professional help once you get assets involved (I'm talking like a retirment account, a house, stocks, etc... Not super rich people stuff) so no matter what you have to pay an accountant that specializes in international taxes and that's not all that cheap either.  If I weren't emotionally attached to my citizenship and identity, I would have renounced already and it looks like it's getting worse with all kinds of FATCA nonsense. Thanks for the public education, US but it looks like I may have to self exclude myself from ever mvoing back because of stupid bullshit.
"In your case, I believe the answer is that you don't owe any taxes, if your deductions exceed your income. There is something called the Alternate Minimum Tax to catch ""rich"" people, who claim ""too many"" deductions. Basically, it taxes their ""gross"" income at a lower rate, but allows them no deductions if they make $175,000 or more. You are not in that tax ""bracket."""
When you do your tax return, your total income from the year from all sources is added up. So you will need to include your employment income as well as your contractor income. Any tax taken off at source through PAYE will then be deducted from how there is to pay. So whether you pay the tax or your employer pays it, it should end up the same, although the timing will differ. There will be differences in National Insurance treatment, and you don't necessarily have a free option to choose which happens - the nature of your relationship may mean you have to be classed as either employed or self-employed under HMRC rules.
Is it cheaper to send in state tax now or wait until I file my return? Unless not paying now will trigger some sort of state tax penalty (which will depend on your situation and what state you live in), there's no practical difference between paying now and paying when you file.  The only thing you lose by paying now will be the possible return you could earn by investing it, which is probably minimal. I would be more concerned about the penalties than any opportunity costs.
Not correct. First - when you say they don't tax the reimbursement, they are classifying it in a way that makes it taxable to you (just not withholding tax at that time).  In effect, they are under-withholding, if these reimbursement are high enough, you'll have not just a tax bill, but penalties for not paying enough all year.  My reimbursements do not produce any kind of pay stub, they are a direct deposit, and are not added to my income, not as they occur, nor at year end on W2.  Have you asked them why they handle it this way? It's wrong, and it's costing you.
"If you're referring to times when they pay nothing (or receive a refund) at the end of the year, it's because they're paying taxes throughout the year. At the end of the year, the accountants find that they paid exactly what they needed to (or more), so they don't have to pay anything (or get money back) on their yearly forms.  I don't think there's a US corporation paying ""almost zero tax"" in the US."
"Canada did not introduce income taxes before World War I.  Specifically deficits forced them to in the later part of the war: The Conservatives opposed income tax as they wanted to attract immigrants primarily from the United Kingdom and the United States, as opposed to Eastern Europe, and they wanted to give their preferred choice of newcomers some incentive to come to Canada. Wartime expenses forced the Tories to re-consider their options and in 1917 the wartime government imposed a ""temporary"" income tax to cover expenses. Despite the new tax the Canadian government ran up considerable debts during the war and were unable to forego income tax revenue after the war ended. With the election of the Mackenzie King-led Liberal government, much of the National Policy was dismantled and income tax has remained in place ever since. So from a Canadian point of view they were introduced as part of the war effort."
For two reasons: 1- People are entitled to deductions and credits that your employer cannot possibly know. Only you as an individual know about your personal situation and can therefore claim these deductions and credits by filing income tax returns. 2- Me telling you that you made $100,000 last year is not the same as telling you that you made $125,000 last year, but someone took $25,000 out of your pocket. Tax season is the one time of the year when citizens know exactly what chunk of their hard earned money was taken by the government, creating more collective awareness about taxation and giving politicians a harder time when they propose raising taxes.
Why is the US still working with paper checks when Europe went digital about a decade ago? Tax filing is just another area in which the US is lagging. Modernizing it costs money, and the US is quite close to bankruptcy (as seen by the repeated government shutdowns).  Also, the US tax code is quite complicated. For instance, I doubt there's anyone who has a full and complete list of all allowed deductions.  Some comments wonder about multiple incomes. This doesn't require tax filing either. My local tax authority just sends me a combined statement with data from 2 employers and 2 banks, and asks me to confirm the resulting payment. This is possible because tax number usage is strictly regulated. SSN abuse in the US presumably makes this problematic.