vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
Residents of Canada must pay Canadian income tax on their worldwide income (source: Wikipedia). However, there is a tax treaty between the U.S. and Canada; I haven't read it, but my guess is that it will allow you to claim a tax credit in Canada for the capital gains tax you have paid to the U.S.
You are being extremely aggressive and I don't understand why, I've been pretty level headed. I agreed with the central point that the rate is too high, but I also think all loopholes and tax breaks should be removed. I also agree that chasing profits made in other countries is silly and is obviously a major contributor in the issue of inversion.  I just simply disagree that our largest companies are paying the highest taxes in the world, when the data I've seen clearly shows that other countries with lower rates are still collecting more. If our rate is the highest, but we still collect less than the average, tell me how these large corporations are being effectively taxed at the highest rate in the developed world? What am I missing?
Hey Buddy, I like how you echo the same BS the top 1% spews.  Time to educate you with some simple math (using arbitrary numbers to explain my point).   top 1% has $1,000,000 Bottom 80% has $1000  I say bottom 80%, because it is effectively top 1%, next 19%-20%, and remaining 80%   Top 1% tax @24.7%    --&gt; $1,000,000 / 24.75 = $753,000  Bottom 80% tax @30%   --&gt; $1000 / 30 = $700  $753,000 &gt; $700  Do you see the problem?    Sure, the rich pay $247,000 in taxes compared to $300 for the bottom 80%.  However, the wealth is still greatly disproportionate even after taxes.  Hence, why the wealth gap is increasing year over year.   *Edit The tax rates @24.7% and @30% are the numbers for 2015, assuming not much has changed since. I am using $1,000,000 and $1,000 as arbitrary representations of wealth; for better understanding the issue.
"Damn right.  The USA appears to have one of the highest productivity per capita rates around.  Actually, when you measure its productivity per man-hour, it's merely average.  America makes up for sub-par productivity by just working longer hours.  It's a ""Boxer the Horse"" work-ethic.  Infrastructure falling behind?  ""I will work harder.""  Wages falling?  ""I will work harder.""  Patent trolling?  ""I will work harder.""  Labor laws being violated?  ""I will work harder.""  Layoffs?  ""I will work harder."""
From tax perspective, any income you earn for services performed while you're in the US is US-sourced. The location of the person paying you is of no consequence. From immigration law perspective, you cannot work for anyone other than your employer as listed on your I-20. So freelancing would be in violation of your visa, again - location of the customer is of no consequence.
&gt; Tax rates do make a difference between whether to invest here or in Ireland.   Not actual investment, but if you have the discretion to chanel profits to a lower taxed jurisdiction (necessarily a loophole that can be closed), then you may structure transactions accordingly.  &gt; he money that American businesses profit overseas stays overseas instead of being repatriated because the taxes are too high to justify paying them before reinvesting the money in the economy.   That is an issue that is also independent of tax rates.  Providing incentives to bring money back is unlikely to finance any new investment though.  There are loopholes that allow using foreign assets (cash especially) to fund foreign loans that can finance any desired investment.  Still, even if repatriation is used for stock buybacks and dividends that would be more money flowing into the US, though not really money flowing to people who spend a high portion of flows (rich investors).  But just because there are reasonable arguments for tax reform encouraging repatriation and HQ locations as at least not being harful, does not support also including the genuinely directly harmful effects of cuts to tax rates.
According to the tax reform framework, changes to the current tax code would eliminate important provisions, such as the state and local tax deduction, while nearly doubling the standard deduction and eliminating personal and dependency exemptions. NAR believes the result would all but nullify the incentive to purchase a home for most, amounting to a de facto tax increase on homeowners, putting home values across the country at risk and ensuring that only the top 5 percent of Americans have the opportunity to benefit from the mortgage interest deduction.  This isn't good and serves no benefit. You would THINK someone with a background in real Estate would know this. It appears not.  There would also be a rise in rents as taxes go up.
Then we are on the same page. However realistically we cannot change some of the stupid tax laws fast enough. The fact is, how I see it, is we must do something two years ago to fix this. This means cuts. I can be as idealistic as I want, but that will not fix anything.  (yes I'm fucking frustrated)
&gt; If you have a different currency from the U.S. Dollar, and it increases in value greatly, do you have to pay tax on that increased value relative to the U.S. dollar?  Technically, all profit you make as a US citizen or resident is subject to tax. It doesn't matter in what currency the profit takes place, and it doesn't matter if the profit never hits US dollars at all. You made profit, you owe tax.  Obviously the IRS is not going to bother with enforcing taxation on that Canadian twenty-dollar bill in your wallet from your last trip to Vancouver. But if you're sitting on a million dollars in Bitcoin profit, and the IRS finds out about it, expect them to start caring quite a bit.  &gt; There isn't much of a transaction record, is there?  There is in fact a detailed and public transaction record. What there isn't is an easy way to match wallets to people; however, all similar machine learning projects seem to indicate that it wouldn't be hard at all to make these matchups.
And let's say that your tax rate now and in the future is 25% (and for simplicity, assume that all income is taxed at that rate instead of the tax bracket system). And capital gains tax is 15%. You see a few things: Traditional IRA and Roth IRA are equivalent if the tax rates are the same. This is because, in both cases, you pay tax one time on the money (the only difference between paying tax now and later is the tax rate). It doesn't matter that you're paying tax only on the principal for the Roth and on the principal plus earnings for Traditional, because the principal now is equivalent to the principal plus earnings in the future. And you also see that investing money outside fares worse than both of them. That is because you are paying tax on the money once plus some more. When you compare it against the Roth IRA, the disadvantage is obvious -- in both cases you pay income tax on the principal, but for Roth IRA you pay nothing on the earnings, whereas for the outside stock, you pay some tax on the earnings. What may be less obvious is it is equally disadvantageous compared to a Traditional IRA; Traditional and Roth IRA are equivalent in this comparison. 401(k)s and IRAs have a fundamental tax benefit compared to normal money investment, because they allow money to be taxed only one time. No matter how low the capital gains tax rate it, it is still worse because it is a tax on time-value growth from money that is already taxed.
The point is, they shouldn't be taxing it at all. The US's fair share of that revenue is 0%. It's wasn't produced via their infrastructure or anything. It's pure double dipping. It's not up to the US to determine it's fair share of someone else's pie. It's pure American arrogance: interfering in business in other countries.
&gt; Illinois is only one of 8 states with a flat income tax. It needs a progressive income tax in line with its neighboring states.  It's against the State's constitution and they get around it by doing higher local property taxes, which is basically a proxy for targeting wealthier individuals.
I would argue no. It's easy to correlate home prices based on size, neighborhood, school district, condition and other factors, such as property taxes. In fact, real estate people and government assessors use those characteristics to assess property value. The demographics of a home will drive desirability/demand for the property. Combine that with the cost and availability of capital, and house prices are relatively predictable.
I disagree that it's double taxation because it's too different entities with different responsibilities and requirements from citizens. Even if you insist it's double taxation, the alternatives, such as the federal government relying on state governments for revenue or states manipulating taxes to coerce federal government, are much worse outcomes.
&gt; Most of that money goes into regulations of and subsidies  source.  &gt;Everyone profits equally from courts and police  I live in a rural low crime area. I don't benefit as much from taxes to fund court and police employees as someone from an urban high crime area. I don't mind paying it though because it's helping *other Americans.*  &gt;you force a minority at gunpoint to pay confiscatory tax rates  I never said minorities had to pay for it. We can stop giving out [1.3 trillion](http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/04/06/the-biggest-u-s-tax-breaks/) every year in tax subsidies to pay for it.
I think you're misunderstanding how tax brackets work. If you make $1 more and that bumps you into a higher bracket, only THAT particular dollar will be taxed at the higher tax bracket rate... Not your entire income.  Short term capital gains are treated as income.  Long term capital gains have a special tax rate currently.
"New York State is one of a few states that will go after telecommuter taxes (such that some people may end up paying double tax even if they don't live in NY).  There are a few ways that you can avoid this. If you NEVER come to NY for work, and your employer can stipulate that your position is only available to be filled remotely, you will likely be covered. But there are a myriad of factors relating to this such as whether the employer reimburses you for your home office and whether you keep ""business records"" at your office.  Provided you can easily document the the factors in TSB-M-06(5)I, you shouldn't have to pay NYS taxes.  (source: I've worked with a NYS tax attorney as an employer to deal with this exact scenario)."
You're missing the point. The US is double dipping as the jurisdiction where the money was earn and taxed too the first dip. It is direct interference in another country's economy and an attack on their sovereignty. Frankly, it smack of typical American conservatism: taking the view that the rest of the world is just an American colony. It's fundamentally undemocratic.
Look at [Nike's 10K Annual Report From 2016](http://s1.q4cdn.com/806093406/files/doc_financials/2016/ar/docs/nike-2016-form-10K.pdf).  It is bull.  About 50% of their main business comes from North America.    Big businesses suck for this reason.  Small business owners get taxed more than you.  (Their effective tax rate in 2016 was 18.7%)
Payroll taxes are only paid on salary, so you will be paying SS Tax and Medicare only on the $60,000 you pay yourself.  You will still pay income tax on the distribution, of course, but the payroll tax savings seem significant (~$13K according to the calculator below). While tinkering with a new web technology some time ago, I created this JsFiddle application.  I can't swear to its correctness, but I'm pretty sure it's solid (use the UI in the bottom right quadrant of the screen): http://jsfiddle.net/psandler/NKAZd/
In some circumstances losses from self-employment can be offset against total income and/or capital gains. If this applies to you may be able to claim back some of the tax taken by PAYE from your day job.  You can also to some extent carry the loss backwards into previous tax years or forward into the next one if you can't use it fully this year. HMRC have some information available on the current rules: When you can claim losses  You can claim: But You can’t claim:
"Nothing ""happens"" to it. It works the same way regardless of whether you are a U.S. citizen or resident or not. Taxes and penalties work the same way on withdrawal. That said, if you are not in the U.S. and don't have any income in the U.S. in a particular year in the future, you can take advantage of the fact that your U.S. tax that year will probably be zero. Then, if you withdraw a little bit, even if they count as taxable income, your U.S. income will still be so low that it may be under your personal exemption, or if not at least it will be taxed in the lowest tax bracket."
Bad idea. If you lose your job and need to pay medical expenses, you can withdraw penalty-free. If you lose your job and just withdraw, you will have lower income and lower tax, though you will pay a penalty. If you don't lose your job today, consider your 401(k) an additional protection, just in case you do lose it tomorrow. Just pick the least risky investment option and relax.  Besides, it will diversify your investment and protect you from your own investment decisions. If you are so ready to take a 10% loss, you are likely not so skilled in this area, so it's good to have a backup plan. But of course, do contribute 3% so you get a match.
You can find the details in the IRS instructions for the form 5405. Summary - you have to repay the credit if you move, even if it is because you were laid off. However, if you sell the house, the repayment is limited by your gains. If you sell at a loss - you don't need to repay. Also, if you die, you don't have to repay, don't know if it helps.
"I disagree with @Sam's answers:  yes you will get that money back when your tax return is processed.  This is not true. You will receive funds that are in excess of your liability (contrary to popular belief, the government does not take more than what you are liable for).   ""is it possible to return the check and modify how it's calculated if I talk to payroll?""  No. When you sign your documents at the beginning of the year, that will dictate the amount of liability they take from each of your paychecks.  ""Will this difference be given back in my next tax return"" Because your company is withdrawing 25% on your paycheck you may/or may not need to pay more depending on the rest of your salary.  The IRS has set the system up as brackets. You pay your taxes based on the amount earned (voluntarily or involuntarily). So if you have income of $9,275 you would pay $923 in taxes at a marginal rate of 10% (and average rate of 10%). If you made $10,000, you would pay $923+$109=$1,032 with your marginal rate as 15% (while your average rate is 10.31%).  All in all, this is dependent on your salary, filing, and other deductions to raise or lower your tax liability.  Note: The $109 came from this: [(10,000-9,275)*.15]"
One small note:  If you have an employer sponsored account and get let go you might have an issue.  You would lose any funds in the account as of the day of your unemployment if you don't have enough expenses to use it all up!  So if you put in a lot every month because you have a large planned expense like root canal or operation then you could lose it all.  This happened to me.
You report it as an expense against the 1099 income when you do your taxes. You will only be taxed on the amount after the lawyers fees (but if it cost you more in lawyers fees than you recover in damages, the loss is not deductible). Be sure to keep documentation of the lawyers bill and the contract. Compensatory damages are generally not taxable at all. You can see here for more information on that.
"Unemployment insurance provides a temporary safety net to workers who lose their jobs by replacing a portion of their salary for certain periods. Each state administers its own unemployment insurance program so some rules may vary from state to state. To receive unemployment insurance payments, you must have lost your job through no fault of your own. If you quit your job or lost it because of poor performance or another justifiable reason, you are not eligible for unemployment insurance benefits. State unemployment insurance programs require claimants to have worked sufficiently before they can claim benefits. As soon as you apply for unemployment insurance, an agency with the state in which you live will verify that you were a victim of a layoff by contacting your previous employer and making sure you lost your job due to lack of work and not an action within your control. After the state verifies you were indeed the victim of a layoff, your weekly payment is calculated. Your payment will be a percentage of what you made in your previous job, generally between 20 percent and 50 percent, depending on your state. Unemployment insurance replaces only a portion of your previous pay because it is intended to pay only for the essentials of living such as food and utilities until you find new employment. Before you begin receiving benefits, you must complete a waiting period of typically one or two weeks. If you find a new job during this period, you will not be eligible for unemployment benefits, even if the job does not pay you as much as your previous job. After the waiting period, you will begin to receive your weekly payments. Employers pay for unemployment insurance through payroll taxes. So, while employees' work and earnings history are important to funding their unemployment benefits, the money does not come from their pay. Employer unemployment insurance contributions depend on several factors, including how many former employees have received benefits. Employers pay taxes on an employee's base wages, which vary by state. California, for example taxes employers on the first $7,000 of an employee's annual earnings, while neighboring Oregon taxes up to $32,000 of wages. Employers must set aside funds each payroll period and then report taxes and pay their states quarterly. States have several categories of tax rates they charge employers. New businesses and those first adding employees pay the ""new rate,"" which is typically lower and geared toward small businesses.
This is only one of a series of questions your friend needs to understand. They will also need to know what happens to: vacation balances; the vacation earning schedule; retirement fund matching; the pension program; all the costs and rules regarding health, dental and vision;life insurance amounts. Some of these can be changed immediately. Some will not be changed this year because of IRS regulations. Everything can be changed by the next year. But there is no way to know if they will change a little a possible or as much a possible. It will depend on if they are buying the company, or if the company is going out of business and the new company is buying the remnants. They may also be essentially terminating the employees at the old place, and giving them the first opportunity for interviews. If they are essentially quitting they will not have to continue paying into the plan. The bad news is that their last day of work is also probably their last day to incur expenses that they can pay for with the flexible plan. If They are being purchased or absorbed the company will likely make no changes to the current plan, and fold them into the plan next year. I have been involved with company purchases and company splits, and this is how it was handled.
"Time to learn how accounting works!  When a company loses money, it does not pay taxes. Just throwing numbers out, but suppose GE earned - $10 billion (that's a negative) in 2009. If in 2010 it earned $5 billion, it would not pay any taxes. It wouldn't pay taxes until it got back to even.   Tax refund is nonsense. It is a tax asset, which is reported as ""income"" when it is recognized on the books. So when GE recognized its ""$3.4 billion tax refund,"" it was actually noting that it would not have to pay cash taxes until it made enough to generate a tax burden over and beyond $3.4 billion."
No, just as the profits from the bank do not go to their personal accounts and instead go to the banks coffers, where they are paid out as a dividend.   If your company makes a mistake and loses money, do they draw it from your account?
"If your sole proprietorship losses exceed all other sources of taxable income, then you have what's called a Net Operating Loss (NOL). You will have the option to ""carry back"" and amend a return you filed in the last 2 years where you owed tax, or you can ""carry forward"" the losses and decrease your taxes in a future year, up to 20 years in the future. For more information see the IRS links for NOL. Note: it's important to make sure you file the NOL correctly so I'd advise speaking with an accountant. (Especially if the loss is greater than the cost of the accountant...)"
DJClayworth's response is generally correct. You wouldn't have to pay taxes on insurance benefits, since those are in fact bringing you whole to what you've lost. However, in some cases you do need to consider taxes. Specifically, if the insurance payout is higher than your cost basis in the lost property. While you may think that this never happens (why would the insurance company pay more than what it cost you?), it in fact quite frequently does. Specific example would be a car used in your business. If you used your car as part of your business and deducted car depreciation on your tax return - your cost basis was reduced by the depreciation. Getting a full car cost payout form insurance would in fact constitute taxable income to you for the difference between your cost basis (adjusted for the depreciation) and the payout. Another example would be collectibles. Say you bought a car 20 years ago at $5000, you maintained it well during the years (assume you spend another $5000 on repairs), and it is now insured at FMV of $50000. But, alas, it got destroyed by a mountain lion who climbed over the fence and pushed it over a cliff. You got a $50000 payout from your insurance company (because you insured it for full FMV coverage, as a collectible should be insured), of which $40000 will be taxable to you. There may be more specific cases where insurance payouts are (partially) taxable. However, as a general rule, they're not, as long as they're at or below your cost basis level.
Your employer pays the expected (but estimated) taxes for you. So the chances are you don't own more; but that might be different if you have other sources of income that he doesn't know about (interest on savings or a side-job or whatever). Also, you could have deductions that reduce the taxes you owe, which he again doesn't know, so you overpay. If you don't file, you don't get them back. Most tax software companies offer free usage of their tool for standard filings, and you can use it to find out your tax situation, and then buy the tool only when you want to file. If you use one of those, you can type in all your data, and depending on the result, decide to buy it and file right away. Note that if it turns out you owe taxes, you must file (and pay), but of course you can do it manually instead of buying the tool. If it turns out you get money back, it is your decision to file - you probably don't care for a small amount, but if you get 1000 $ back, you might want to file - again, buying the software of doing it manually.
How is it a write off? I write off my mortgage interest, it reduces my taxable income, but has no impact on my EBIT.  If I paid workers more, my EBIT would go down and, due to this, my taxable income would go down.  One is independent of my earnings, the other is a function of it.  The former is a write off, the latter isn't, right?
The only consequence I could see is that they have your money until they pay you back. I'd just do what JoeTaxpayer says and get it back.
So now that you realize you are wrong your response is stop crying? I'm sorry I don't like to see my fellow man being stolen from. Also as a 1099 worker you are still subject to income tax and jail time if not paid. That's the part of this you don't fucking get. If I don't give the government my money I get kidnapped and thrown into a fucking cage.