vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
"There are a few sites out there that can give you some reasoning behind the request. LegalZoom, for instance.  To quote the LZ doc in case the link dies: Employee vs. Independent Contractor If a worker is an employee, the employer is responsible for paying   Social Security, unemployment insurance, Medicare, and possibly other   costs like workers' compensation insurance for the employee; at the   end of the tax year, the employer is responsible for compiling all   necessary payroll reports, including W-2 forms. If a worker is an independent contractor, the employer is not   responsible for any of the above taxes or payments, and the only added   paperwork is the issuing of a 1099 to the independent contractor at   the end of the tax year, if he or she has made more than $600 with the   employer. As Kent suggested, you should speak with an attorney (really you need one if setting up an LLC). There are a lot of companies out there these days that try to classify people as contractors rather than full-time employees as it gets them out of paying benefits and dealing with taxes. This is being heavily cracked down on, and several ""contractor"" employees are winning lawsuits to get full-time status.  If you are truly acting as a contractor, then setting up an LLC can help with a few items such as taxes and protection on certain business aspects (see comments below regarding this). It's easy and relatively cheap (cost me about $250 with extra legal advice tacked on). If you are reporting directly to a manager with the company, or really working in any way that isn't consistent with the definition of a contractor, then I'd turn down the offer and ask to be made a FT employee.  Additional information: https://www.sba.gov/content/hire-contractor-or-employee"
A computer is a special case because the IRS thinks that you might be using it for personal applications.    You may need to keep a log, or be able to state that you also have another computer for non-business use. That said, if your schedule C shows a small profit then you don't need to itemize expenses, just state the total.
Aside from daily living expenses, there are other costs worth considering, because they are just as important to your children’s development as their basic needs. These include education expenses, day care or babysitting and medical costs, birthday parties, bar/bat mitzvah, and car expenses.
You should check several things: How your business can deduct your child care expenses is beyond me. If your mother-in-law starts a business as a neighborhood babysitter, she might get some deductions for her related expenses though.
Keep this rather corny acronym in mind. Business expenses must be CORN: As other posters have already pointed out, certain expenses that are capital items (computers, furniture, etc.) must be depreciated over several years, but you have a certain amount of capital items that you can write off in the current tax year.
Here is how your CEO has to see it. Of course, eventually most revenues are generated by IT systems but technically IT still is an expense only activity unless of course you are selling the software/services offered by it. According to the US GAAP, software development costs are capitalized when a firm develops a software for its own use (e.g., nice shiny UI show bank's VaR, algorithmic trading engines, internal security infrastructure etc.).  When the software is developed for sale, all the costs are expensed as incurred until the technical feasibility is established after which the costs are capitalized. The income is realized when licenses to use the software or the services provided by it are sold. According to international standards, the treatment for both the use cases shown above is the same --all the costs are expensed as incurred until the technical feasibility is established after which the costs are capitalized. The income is realized when licenses to use the software or the services provided by it are sold.
"When I have a question about my income taxes, the first place I look is generally the Giant Book of Income Tax Information, Publication 17 (officially called ""Your Federal Income Tax""). This looks to be covered in Chapter 26 on ""Car Expenses and Other Employee Business Expenses"". It's possible that there's something in there that applies to you if you need to temporarily commute to a place that isn't your normal workplace for a legitimate business reason or other business-related travel. But for your normal commute from your home to your normal workplace it has this to say:  Commuting expenses.   You cannot deduct the costs of taking a bus, trolley, subway, or taxi, or of driving a car between your home and your main or regular place of work. These costs are personal commuting expenses. You cannot deduct commuting expenses no matter how far your home is from your regular place of work. You cannot deduct commuting expenses even if you work during the commuting trip."
"In the US service animals are treated like durable medical equipment from a tax POV, and some expenses can be deducted. Likewise, expenses associated with working animals are business or hobby expenses than can be deducted to a certain extent.  But pets, no. Legally they are ""chattels"" -- property that can move. Generally speaking, you can't deduct the cost of maintaining your belongings."
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? The owner is paying personal income tax on roughly $90,000. The government is getting the support it needs. Yes, some owners do all the ""encouraged"" things so that some income is not taxed either in the business or the personal sphere. That is presumably what the government wanted when it set those things up as deductions. Making charitable contributions, hiring new employees, building new facilities ... essentially the government is paying the business to do those things because they're good for the country. The overall government budget (funded by personal and corporate income tax along with sales tax, excises taxes etc) is supposed to achieve certain goals which include roads and schools but also job creation and the like. This is one of the ways they do that."
This sounds like a rental fee as described in the instructions for the 1099-MISC.   Enter amounts of $600 or more for all types of rents, such as    any of the following. ... Non-Employee compensation does not seem appropriate because you did not perform a service. You mention that your tax-preparer brought this up.  I think you will need to consult with a CPA to receive a more reliable opinion.  Make sure to bring the contract that describes the situation with you.  From there, you may need to consult a tax attorney, but the CPA should be able to help you figure out what your next step is.
Lol and a company spending more than they need to on labor is reality? Thanks for pointing me in the right direction. Ill be sure to run all future thoughts I have by you to ensure that fit into your 'reality'.
Nope sorry guest you are wrong.  how can salary and an expense be on the same side of the ledger? Salary                    2000 Personal bank      2000  Phone expenses       30 Personal bank             30
You'd probably have to sue them to get the money. In most cases those statements have disclaimers all over them telling you about the vesting period and technically that extra money was probably never really in your account.  Normally the statements also break out the actual contributions from the employer match part and have a footnote about the vesting policy. Unless the employer was completely incompetent in their management of this account, I am betting they will have documentation of the policy that you supposedly were given.  You probably have very slim chances of prevailing on this unless they were very lax in their documentation. I'd say re-check the statements and your employee manually carefully for any mention of vesting. If you don't find it, ask the employer (nicely) where you were notified of this. If they still can't produce any documentation, then sue them.
I agree with mbhunter's suggestion of labeling your columns, 'income' and 'expenses'. However, to answer your question, money coming in (a paycheque, for example) is credited to your account. Money going out (a utility bill, for example) is debited from your account. There's no real 'why'... this is simply the definition of the words.
Going through the same thing right now, about to lose our company phones (that I use constantly, since my workday doesn't end at 5) and they cut our training budget to $0.   Yet execs can run out and buy whatever software they want, even if its pointless, we're constantly bringing in sub-contractors at 4x the hourly rate of staff, and they sure aren't putting their paid country club memberships and private plane on the line.
In principle, when you are the sole owner of a limited company, and also the sole employee, then it is much easier to assume that someone else is the employee. Let's say your twin brother John Adler.  John Adler receives a salary from David Adler's company. Of course John has to pay income tax on his salary. Absolutely in the UK, and in Estonia as well if they have any sensible tax laws at all (which I assume but don't know for sure).  Then there is the company. It's profit equals revenue, minus cost. You said £4000 revenue, and John Adler's salary, plus anything the company has to pay on top of the salary, is cost, which is subtracted from the revenue to calculate profit. In the UK, the company pays 20% corporation tax on those profits, and the rest stays in its bank account (or may be in goods that the company purchased).  Where does David Adler come in? He owns the company, but doesn't work for it and gets no salary. He owns the company, but he does not own the company's money. He can't just help himself to the money. He can get a loan from the company, and is personally responsible for repaying that loan. If it's not repaid, HMRC will be very angry which will hurt. Or he can pay himself a dividend, and pays dividend tax on it. Or of course he can leave the money in the company.  That's exactly how it works in the UK, and I would assume Estonia to be similar. And of course if it's not the twin brother who is the employee, but the OP himself, then the situation is exactly the same.
I suggest taking a look at your pay stub or pay statement. Your employer should provide you with one for each time you get paid. This shows your gross income (pay period and year to date or YTD for short) and all stuff that gets deducted and how your actual payment is calculated. In my case there are nine things that get taken off: Other things that might show up there are various life or accident insurances, Child Care flexible spending account, legal & pet insurances, long term disability, etc. Some of those are under your control (through benefit election or contribution choices), others you just have to live with. Still, it's worth spending the time to look at it occasionally.
Yes, you can deduct from your taxable profits (almost) any expenses incurred in the course of your business. See here for HMRC's detailed advice on the subject. The fact that you have salaried PAYE employment as well makes no difference.
"I pay taxes on revenue.  You do have the ability to deduct expenses, though it's not as comprehensive as what companies can do: These figures apply to everybody, so those that earn more get taxed more on thee additional income in each bracket (meaning the first $100,000 of taxable income is taxed the same for everybody at one rate, the next $100,000 at a different rate, etc.) So you do get to deduct personal expenses and get taxed on ""profit"" - but since the vast majority of people don't keep detailed records of what they spend, it's much simpler just to use blanket deduction amounts for everyone. Companies have much more detailed systems in place to track and categorize expenses, so it's easier to just tax on net profit. Plus, the corporate tax rate is much higher than the average individual tax rate - would you trade more deductions for a higher tax rate?"
What about web-hosting fees? Cost of Internet service? Cost of computer equipment to do the work? Amortized cost of development? Time for support calls/email? Phone service used for sales? Advertising/marketing expenses? Look hard--I bet there are some costs.
&gt; the gov'ts take care of that  Which makes it free, of course.  Oh, no, it doesn't.  &gt; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pensions_in_Germany  &gt; 1st pillar: mandatory State Pension Insurance (gesetzliche Rentenversicherung). This part of the basic social security system. All employees and employers pay a percentage of salaries into this system.  So, basically, company has to spend $X on employee's compensation, but employee gets $X-$Y in hands, where $Y goes into taxes, pension funding and so on.  It DOES NOT MATTER for a corporation whether that $Y goes into a private pension fund or is paid to government, it only cares about amount $X.
You would need to pay taxes in India on your salary. It is not relevant whether the funds are received as INR or GBP. The taxes would be as per normal tax brackets. Note that if your company is not deducting any taxes, you would need to keep paying Advance Taxes as per schedule, else there would be penalty. Depending on your contract with the UK Company, there are certain expenses you can claim. For example laptop / net connection / etc if these are not already reimbursed. Consult a CA and he would advise you more on any tax saving opportunity.
"There are 2 different things, As per IT Act, one can get ""Medical Reimbursement"" upto Rs 15,000 which is tax free. The way it is supposed to work is an employee submits bill and employer will ""Reimburse"" upto Rs 15,000. So if one does not submit any bills, he does not get any money. If the employer has given the employee Rs 15,000 without any bills, it would have been taxed as per the tax bracket. In practise all employer factor the Rs 15,000 in the salary to the employee. If bills are submitted, then its tax free. If bill are not submitted, partially submitted, the difference is paid as ""Allowance"" and hence becomes taxable. Apart from above there is section 80D that provides additional rebate. Upto Rs 15,000 when health insurance is taken. Upto Rs 5,000 for Health checkup. Hence if you submit the details to your employer you will get rebate in tax, on Rs 5,000 it would be Rs 1,500/-. You would not get ""Reimbursement"". I should mention 20,000 under medical expenses Nope both are under different section as such you should declare these separately."
(1). Is this right? Pretty much, though this is a really rudimentary way to think about it. (2). If it is, why is it that extensive services are provided by high margin companies competing for talent, rather then lower margin businesses looking to boost their profits by reducing their expenditures on employees (by cutting out the government)? It's the polar opposite of that. Google (and companies like that) do things like have a day care center on premises. The company staffs a day care center which has costs, then lets employees use it for free. This is a business expense for Google, and in relative terms, a considerably large business expense that a lower margin business could no afford. Employer healthcare is a tax protected expense for employees via section 125 of the tax code. The company portion of the healthcare costs are a deductible business expense to the company, as expected. Healthcare is different than most other expenses because the employee can forego income before it's effectively received which negates it from taxable income. This doesn't work for something like food purchased at a cafe on a Google complex. If employee money is being spent at a corporate cafe, it's taxable income being spent (though the cost of running the cafe is a tax deductible business expense to the company). There have been discussions in congress to assess a value as income to employees for services like on site child care and no cost employee cafeterias. To address your new example: For example, suppose John Doe makes $100,000 a year taxed at a rate of 20%, for a take home pay of $80,000. He spends $10,000 on food. His employer Corporation decides to give him all of his food and deduct it as a business expense - costing them $10,000. But now they can pay John Doe an amount so his take home pay will be reduced by $10,000 - $87,500 The company is now spending $97500 employing John Doe, for a savings of $2500$. This would be an audit prone administrative nightmare.
A per diem payment is a cost of doing business for the company, not for you. They can claim it (probably); you can't (definitely).
Higher business tax rates, incentivises businesses to spend to avoid taxes.  spending is always either on more employees, or buying things that supports more employees in other companies.  Its easily possible (links provided elsewhere in thread) to have higher tax rates without incentivizing the moving of HQs for tax arbitrage.  Globalized production is motivated much more by labour costs than it is by tax rates, but its also easy to use higher tax rates to encourage local spending.  Economists don't lobby politicians.  Only liars need to do that.
Also, if accounting suddenlly decides to hire a bunch of new employees why should the cost for the computers come out of IT's budget?   As long as IT's budget is subserviant to the whims of other departments you can't really call it a budget at all. Rather, it is just a pool of money that anyone can dip in to.
Adding to webdevduck's answer: Before you calculate your profits, you can pay money tax-free into a pension fund for the company director (that is you). Then if you pay yourself dividends, if you made lots of profit you don't have to pay it all as dividends. You can take some where the taxes are low, and then pay more money in later years. What you must NOT do is just take the money. The company may be yours, but the money isn't. It has to be paid as salary or dividend. (You can give the company director a loan, but that loan has to be repaid. Especially if a limited company goes bankrupt, the creditors would insist that loans from the company are repaid). After a bit more checking, here's the optimal approach, perfectly legal, expected and ethical: You pay yourself a salary of £676 per month. That's the point where you get all the advantages of national insurance without having to pay; above that you would have to pay 13.8% employers NI contributions and 12% employee's NI contributions, so for £100 salary the company has to pay £113.80 and you receive £88.00. Below £676 you pay nothing. You deduct the salary from your revenue, then you deduct all the deductible business costs (be wise in what you try to deduct), then you pay whatever you want into a pension fund. Well, up to I think £25,000 per year. The rest is profit. The company pays 19% corporation tax on profits. Then you pay yourself dividends. Any dividends until your income is £11,500 per year are tax free. Then the next £5,000 per year are tax free. Then any dividends until income + dividends = £45,000 per year is taxed at 7.5%. It's illegal to pay so much in dividends that the company can't pay its bills. Above £45,000 you decide if you want your money now and pay more tax, or wait and get it tax free.
The tax is depended upon state where you are registered and the salary paid. More here  If you employ contract you need not pay tax.
"There is no simple rule like ""you can/can't spend more/less than $X per person."" Instead there is a reasonableness test. There is such a thing as an audit of just your travel and entertainment expenses - I know because I've had one for my Ontario corporation. I've deducted company Christmas parties, and going-away dinners for departing employees, without incident. (You know, I presume, about only deducting half of certain expenses?) If the reason for the entertainment is to acquire or keep either employees or clients, there shouldn't be a problem.  Things are slightly trickier with very small companies. Microsoft can send an entire team to Hawaii, with their families, as a reward at the end of a tough project, and deduct it. You probably can't send yourself as a similar reward. If your party is strictly for your neighbours, personal friends, and close family, with no clients, potential clients, employees, potential employees, suppliers, or potential suppliers in attendance, then no, don't deduct it. If you imagine yourself telling an auditor why you threw the party and why the business funded it, you'll know whether it's ok to do it or not."
S-Corp income is passed through to owners and is taxed on their 1040 as ordinary income. If you take a wage (pay FICA) and then take additional distributions these are not subject to FICA.  A lot of business owners will buy up supplies/ necessary expenses right before the end of the tax year to lower their tax liability.
For IT departments internally billing is essential for managing expectations. Otherwise they are treated as an endless pool of free resources.  That said, it doesn't have to be just in terms of a dollar amount. For example, each department can be allocated a set number of hours per year for software development. That way they are forced to prioritize what they want instead of asking for everything up front.  IT shouldn't actually charge-back labor. To do so would force them to give up their staff budget with the hope that the other departments will give it back. Only charge-back actual physical items like computers.
The pay for leave isn't, or rather shouldn't be a medical expense, but a EI compensation. The point is to take the pressure off the small to medium business owner and put it back on the government where it belongs. Even worse, in the US, mat leave is currently unpaid unless your company deems otherwise, though there are some state level exceptions to this.
Unfortunately, the money that is not vested is not yours.  It belongs to your employer.  They have promised to give it to you after you have been with the company for a certain length of time, but if you aren't still with the company after that time, no matter what the reason, the money never becomes yours. Sorry to hear about this.  It would have been nice if your company had waived the vesting requirement like this guy's employer did, but I don't think they are required to do so, unfortunately. If it's a lot of money, you could ask an attorney, but as @JoeTaxpayer said, AT&T and IBM probably know what they are doing.
"Nope, not deductible. It's true that some investment expenses are deductible, mainly as ""miscellaneous itemized expenses"", though only the amount that exceeds 2% of your adjusted gross income.  But as explained in IRS Pub 550, which lays out the relevant rules: Stockholders' meetings.   You cannot deduct transportation and other expenses you pay to attend stockholders' meetings of companies in which you have no interest other than owning stock. This is true even if your purpose in attending is to get information that would be useful in making further investments."
"I disagree with BrenBran, I don't think this is qualified as unreimbursed employee expense. For it to qualify, it has to be ordinary and necessary, and specifically - necessary for your employer. This is not the case for you, as there's no such necessity. From employer's perspective, you can work from your home just as well. In fact, the expense is your personal, as it is your choice, not ""unreimbursed employee expense"" since your employer didn't even ask you to do it. You should clarify this with a licensed tax adviser (EA/CPA licensed in New York)."