vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
Do some math. Figure out the net (after tax) money you'd have if you left it taxable, then look at the difference. In effect, you'd pay $X (the tax now) for $Y benefit (the tax on the full benefit not paid).  The math works similar to you buying a small policy on your own.
No, unvested money returns to the employer, its not yours. They should send you W2 which will only show the actual (vested) monies you got.
If the IRS has your money (the withholding you mentioned), and you do not owe the IRS any/all of it, you have to file a return to get it back.  No return, no refund.
&gt; will get hit with a 10% penalty plus income tax.  Can I confirm this with you?  I am aware of 20% withholding, but the 10% penalty, in my memory, was only with regards to *in-service* withdrawals, or things like an unpaid loan being deemed a distribution.  If an employee terminated from the company, there was no 10% penalty on withdrawal.  I've kept up a little bit, but it's been 15 years since I was administering pensions day-to-day!
As you point out in your question your risk level is personal.  If you really believe your job is stable there is no more risk.  However the overall evidence is that most jobs are less stable, and if you do lose your job you're likely going to be out of work for a while.  One thing to consider though is that if you have planned on emergency credit in the past, that option is not really viable anymore.
I'm afraid you're not going to get any good news here. The US government infused billions of dollars in capital as part of the bankruptcy deal. The old shares have all been cancelled and the only value they might have to you are as losses to offset other gains. I would definitely contact a tax professional to look at your current and previous returns to create a plan that best takes advantage of an awful situation. It breaks my heart to even think about it.
If you expect your employment away from home in a single location to last, and it does last, for 1 year or less, it is temporary unless facts and circumstances indicate otherwise. If you expect it to last for more than 1 year, it is indefinite. If you expect your employment to last for 1 year or less, but at some later date you expect it to last longer than 1 year, it is temporary (in the absence of facts and circumstances indicating otherwise) until your expectation changes. For guidance on how to determine your tax home refer to Revenue Ruling 93-86. Your main place of business is in the US and this will not change, because your business isn't relocating. If you are intending to work remotely while you are abroad, you should get educated on the relevant laws on where you are going. Most countries don't take kindly to unauthorized work being performed by foreign visitors. And yes, even though you aren't generating income or involving anyone in their country, the authorities still well may disapprove of your working. My answer to a very similar question on Expatriates."
"As Dilip said, if you want actual concrete, based in tax law, answers, please add the country (and if applicable, state) where you pay income tax. Also, knowing what tax bracket you're in would help as well, although I certainly understand if you're not comfortable sharing that. So, assuming the US... If you're in the 10% or 15% tax bracket, then you're already not paying any federal tax on the $3k long term gain, so purposely taking losses is pointless, and given that there's probably a cost to taking the loss (commission, SEC fee), you'd be losing money by doing so. Also, you won't be able to buy back the loser for 31 days without having the loss postponed due to the wash sale that would result. State tax is another matter, but (going by the table in this article), even using the highest low end tax rate (Tennessee at 6%), the $50 loss would only save you $3, which is probably less than the commission to sell the loser, so again you'd be losing money. And if you're in a state with no state income tax, then the loss wouldn't save you anything on taxes at the state level, but of course you'll still be paying to be able to take the loss. On the high end, you'd be saving 20% federal tax and 13.3% state tax (using the highest high end tax state, California, and ignoring (because I don't know :-) ) whether they tax long-term capital gains at the same rate as regular income or not), you'd be saving $50 * (20% + 13.3%) = $50 * 33.3% = $16.65. So for taxes, you're looking at saving between nothing and $16.65. And then you have to subtract from that the cost to achieve the loss, so even on the high end (which means (assuming a single filer)) you're making >$1 million), you're only saving about $10, and you're probably actually losing money. So I personally don't think taking a $50 loss to try to decrease taxes makes sense.
You are not the person or entity against whom the crime was committed, so the Casualty Loss (theft) deduction doesn't apply here. You should report this as a Capital Loss, the same way all of the Enron shareholders did in their 2001 tax returns. Your cost basis is whatever you originally paid for the shares. The final value is presumably zero. You can declare a maximum capital loss of $3000, so if your net capital loss for the year is greater than that, you'll have to carry over the remainder to the following years. IRS publication 547 states: Decline in market value of stock.   You can't deduct as a theft loss the decline in market value of stock acquired on the open market for investment if the decline is caused by disclosure of accounting fraud or other illegal misconduct by the officers or directors of the corporation that issued the stock. However, you can deduct as a capital loss the loss you sustain when you sell or exchange the stock or the stock becomes completely worthless. You report a capital loss on Schedule D (Form 1040). For more information about stock sales, worthless stock, and capital losses, see chapter 4 of Pub. 550.
Its important that you carefully read the agreement, if you accept the job. The options agreement will usually specify the vesting schedule, the strike price, and the number of options you will have.  When you start vesting options, you can choose to buy stock at the strike price. When you do exercise the options, your employer will likely withhold state and federal income tax. The strike price will hopefully be well below the market price.  Unlike stock, when your employment ends, you usually are not able to hold on to your options. There's typically a small window of time in which you can exercise your options. You should read this part of the agreement carefully and plan accordingly.
Wanna make sure every company pays at least some taxes? Install a 'tax floor'. Basically, no matter how many losses you claim, no matter how much you offshore, no matter how many loopholes you find, you can not drop below a certain number. Let's say 15%. That is it, you have to pay at least 15%.   As this takes effect, and only after revenues stream in for a few years to help balance things out, you can even slightly adjust the high rate down a tad to help the big companies that don't use the loopholes.  Please spread this idea around.
The only way you will incur underpayment penalties is if you withhold less than 90% of the current year's tax liability or 100% of last years tax liability (whichever is smaller).  So as long as your total tax liability last year (not what you paid at filing, but what you paid for the whole year) was more than $1,234, you should not have any penalty. What you pay (or get back) when you file will be your total tax liability less what was withheld. For example, you had $1,234 withheld from your pay for taxes.  If after deduction and other factors, your tax liability is $1,345, you will owe $111 when you file.  On the other hand, if your tax liability is only $1,000, you'll get a refund of $234 when you file, since you've had more withheld that what you owe. Since your income was only for part of the year, and tax tables assume that you make that much for the whole year, I would suspect that you over-withheld during your internship, which would offset the lack of withholding on the other $6,000 in income.
"You cannot ""claim back"" VAT. What happens is that if you sell goods with VAT and charge customers VAT, you would have to send that VAT straight to HMRC, but if your business itself paid VAT, then you already paid VAT, so you have to send less.  As an example, if you send an invoice for £10,000 plus £2,000 VAT, and you paid yourself £500 VAT on business related expenses, then you need to send £2,000 - £500 = £1,500 to HMRC.  But if you don't send invoices including VAT, then you owe HMRC £0. Any VAT you paid on business related expenses is lost; HMRC won't pay you money.  BTW. Only VAT on business related expenses can be deducted. So if you want to be ""smart"", register for VAT and get the VAT on your weekly shopping bill refunded, forget it."
If I sell it for $50 can I write off the $50 loss. Only if you can establish that it is a normal part of your business and that you did not get $50 worth of use out of it.  That's the technical, legal argument.  As a practical matter, it's unlikely that they'll ding you for selling something after using it, as they won't know.  If they did catch you, you would be in trouble.  You can't deduct loss due to personal use.   The larger problem is that if you sell one TV for a $50 loss, they aren't going to believe that you are in the business of selling TVs.  If you sell a larger amount for a loss, then they still are unlikely to believe that you are in business.  If you sell a large amount for an overall gain, they are unlikely to notice that you took a loss on one TV.  They could only notice that if they were already auditing you, as that wouldn't be visible in your tax forms.
Depends on the job.  At my current job, when I leave work for the day, I'm done.  But I have friends who would likely lose their jobs if they weren't available outside of normal hours.  They prefer having a source of income to not having one, even if it means that reddit user ngroot considers them a doormat.
According to the gnucash guide, losses are recorded as negative transactions against Income:Capital Gains.  I've followed this model in the past when dealing with stocks and commodities.  If on the other hand, you're talking about an asset which could normally follow a depreciation schedule, you might want to look at the section in the business guide dealing with asset depreciation.
You increase the capital account by the additional contributions and retained earnings and decrease the capital account by the distributions of return of capital and/or losses. Distributing gains doesn't change the capital account. So in your case it would be: 1st year we lost money  Assuming you lost 20K, and the interests are even, it will look like this: 1st year we break even  Nothing changes - you break even, means the balance sheet doesn't change (in this example). 1st year we made money Assume you gained 20K and kept it: If you didn't retain the earnings, it would look the same as case 2 - no change. Note that this is only the financial accounting, tax accounting might look differently. For example, in the US Partnerships (or LLCs taxed as) are pass-through entities, on in case 3 while you retained the earnings, the partners will still be taxed.  I'm of course neither CPA nor a licensed tax adviser. I suggest you get a consultation with one. Only a CPA can provide a reliable accounting advice or sign official financial statements, reviews and audits. Only a EA, CPA or an Attorney specializing in tax law can provide a tax advice.
IANAL but I'd think common sense would say that if you take advantage of one of the special cases that allow you to withdraw from a retirement plan without penalty, and then for whatever reason you don't use the money for a legal purpose, you would have to either return the money or pay the tax penalty. And I'll go out on a limb here without any documentation and guess that if you lie to the IRS and say that you withdrew the money for an exempt purpose and instead use it to go on vacation and you get caught, that you will not only have to pay the tax penalty but will also be liable for criminal charges of tax fraud. If the law and/or IRS regulations say that the only legal exceptions are A, B, and C, that pretty clearly means that if you do D, you are breaking the law. And in the eyes of the government, failing to pay the taxes you owe is way worse than robbery, murder, or rape.
Lets then assume 63,750 is your AGI after other additions and subtractions. 63,750 - 4,050 - 6,300 == 53,400. The federal Tax system is graduated, meaning there are different ranges (brackets) with different percentages. The term tax people use for taxable income of 53,400 is ""marginal tax rate""...so the last dollar they tax at 25%. Other dollars less. According to the IRS, if you're single, then on 53,400, you pay ""$6,897.50 plus 25% of the amount over $50,400"" Or 6897.50 + 750, or 7647.50. Note this is only Federal Income Tax. You will also be paying Social Security and Medicare payroll Tax. And I'm guessing you'll also be paying colorado state income tax. Each state has its own forms and methods for figuring out the taxes and stuff. By the way, when you start, you'll fill out a ""W-4"" form to ""help"" you figure out how much to withhold from every paycheck. (I find the W-4 is not helpful at all). Your company will withhold from your paycheck some mysterious amount, and the process of filling out your 1040A or 1040EZ or whatever will be, likely, to get the over-withheld amount back."
"I have a related issue, since I have some income which is large enough to matter and hard to predict. Start with a best guess. Check what tax bracket you were in last year and withhold that percentage of the expected non-withheld income. Adjust upward a bit, if desired, to reflect the fact that you're getting paid more at the new job. Adjust again, either up or down, to reflect whether you were over-withheld or under-withheld last year (whether the IRS owed you a refund or you had to send a check with your return). Repeat that process next year after next tax season, when you see how well your guess worked out. (You could try pre-calculating the entire tax return based on your expected income and then divide any underpayment into per-paycheck additional withholding... but I don't think it's worth the effort.) I don't worry about trying to get this exactly correct. I don't stress about lost interest if I've over-withheld a bit, and as long as your withholding was reasonably close and you have the cash float available to send them a check for the rest when it comes due, the IRS generally doesn't grumble if your withholding was a bit low.  (It would be really nice if the IRS paid us interest on over-withholding, to mirror the fact that they charge us interest if we're late in returning our forms. Oh well.) Despite all the stories, the IRS really is fairly reasonable; if you aren't deliberately trying to get away with something, the process is annoying but shouldn't be scary. The one time they mail-audited me, it was several thousand dollars in my favor; I'd forgotten to claim some investment losses, and their computers noticed the error. Though I still say the motto of the next revolution will be ""No taxation without proper instructions!"""
If you leave without having met all the obligations in the contract they could sue you for the money. The size of the company may mean that they are experienced in collecting their debts. The insurance they made you pay for, may pay them back if they meet all the requirements in the policy. That means that you will have to read the terms of the policy to see if the insurance company will come after you for the losses. It is likely that your skipping out early while owing money will be attached to your credit history without your SSN.
The IRS can direct your refund towards repayment of your unpaid taxes either on Federal or State/Local level. Whether it will depends on whether the State of New York will ask for it. Generally, if you owe taxes to New York for this year only, you would expect them to wait for you to file your State tax return and pay the taxes owed. If you don't - I'm pretty sure that the next year refund from the IRS will go directly to them.
I would say you can file your taxes on your own, but you will probably want the advice of an accountant if you need any supplies or tools for the side business that might be tax deductible. IIRC you don't have to tell your current employer for tax reasons (just check that your contract doesn't state you can't have a side job or business), but I believe you'll have to tell HMRC. At the end of the year you'll have to file a tax return and at that point in time you'll have to pay the tax on the additional earnings. These will be taxed at your highest tax rate and you might end up in a higher tax bracket, too. I'd put about 40% away for tax, that will put you on the safe side in case you end up in the high tax bracket; if not, you'll have a bit of money going spare after paying your taxes.
Isn't 'net' implying that job losses are already accounted for?  edit:  Now I'm thinking you're saying that the jobs Amazon destroyed need to be subtracted from their net.  Hmm.. Mathematically sound.  Practically next to impossible to determine an accurate number, I expect.
"This answer is based on Australian tax, which is significantly different. I only offer it in case others want to compare situations. In Australia, a popular tax reduction technique is ""Negative Gearing"". Borrow from a bank, buy an investment property. If the income frome the new property is not enough to cover interest payments (plus maintenance etc) then the excess each year is a capital loss - which you claim each year, as an offset to your income (ie. pay less tax). By the time you reach retirement, the idea is to have paid off the mortgage. You then live off the revenue stream in retirement, or sell the property for a (taxed) lump sum."
There's an odd anomaly that often occurs with shares acquired through company plans via ESPP or option purchase. The general situation is that the share value above strike price or grant price may become ordinary income, but a sale below the price at day the shares are valued is a capital loss.  e.g. in an ESPP offering, I have a $10 purchase price, but at the end of the offering, the shares are valued at $100. Unless I hold the shares for an additional year, the sale price contains ordinary W2 income. So, if I see the shares falling and sell for $50, I have a tax bill for $90 of W2 income, but a $50 capital loss. Tax is due on $90 (and for 1K shares, $90,000 which can be a $30K hit) but that $50K loss can only be applied to cap gains, or $3K/yr of income.  In the dotcom bubble, there were many people who had million dollar tax bills and the value of the money netted from the sale couldn't even cover the taxes. And $1M in losses would take 300 years at $3K/yr.  The above is one reason the lockup date expiration is why shares get sold. And one can probably profit on the bigger companies stock.  Edit - see Yelp down 3% following expiration of 180 day IPO lock-up period, for similar situation.
Some types of loans allow for reamortization (recasting) - which does exactly what you're talking about (making a big payment and then refiguring the monthly amount rather than the overall lifespan), without requiring any kind of a fee that refinancing does. Not every, or even most, mortgages, allow for recasting. And most that do offer recasting, may limit the recasting to a once-a-loan type of thing. So check beforehand, and make those big payments before you do any recasting. (Most banks and mortgage servicing companies may not advertise or even speak about recasting options unless you specifically ask your loan officer.)
You would need to check the original mortgage papers you signed with the originators.  Chances are you agreed to allow the mortgage to be sold and serviced by other parties. Refinancing would also put you in the same boat unless you got them to take that clause out of the mortgage/refinance papers. Also, chances are most small banks and originators simply can not keep mortgages on their books. There are also third parties that service loans too that do not actually own the mortgages as well. This is another party that could be involved out of many in your mortgage.  I would also not worry about 127/139 complaints out of 1,100,000 loans. Most probably were underwater on their mortgage but I am sure a few are legitimate complaints.  Banks make mistakes (I know right!).  Anyway, good luck and let me know if you find out anything different.
It is possible to consolidate mortgages with Nationwide, in some circumstances. Quote from their website: It is possible to consolidate different mortgages and other debts such as personal loans and credit cards. However it does depend on your individual circumstances, including the exact type of loans you want to consolidate and whether you are still in a special deal period I, personally, would be amazed if you couldn't get them all in one mortgage without changing provider. But... I wouldn't be at all surprised if they forced you to have this one mortgage as a new mortgage, rather than adding balances to an existing one. My reasoning is as follows: Coming at it from a different angle: whatever there was that required your further borrowing to be in new mortgages, rather than added to your existing mortgage, will also preclude your multiple mortgages being added to one of your existing mortgages.
In a lot of cases, the bank has already made their money. Shortly after you get your mortgage is sold to investors though the bank is still servicing it for a fee. Therefore, if you refinance, they get to sell it again.
IMO they were just being dicks.  I don't know if they are required to provide the payoff amount, but they should be able to at any point in time.  edit: I have mortgage experience.  I didn't see this too often, but borrowers sometimes payoff/include other debts on refis.  This requires a payoff statement from their creditors.  I've never heard of a closing getting pushed back to the next month due to a creditor not being able to provide the payoff.
I said it in the comments, but I think it stands as a possible answer; if the bank's the only one telling you you are ineligible for HARP, get a second opinion. The bank is making lots of money off of you, at a time when the pickings are otherwise slim. The bank doesn't want you to refinance, and will do anything it can to convince you that you can't. Many of the big lenders have been taken to task (and to court) by the government for actively hindering these loan modification programs. So, don't trust the bank's word alone. Go to http://www.harpprogram.org and check the eligibility criteria, and if you think you meet them, fill out an application. The basic criteria are: Some caveats:
It depends on the type of loan.  Fully amortized loans have a schedule of payments don't recalculate as you pay.  If you want to make an additional payment you need to contact the lender to apply your payment toward principle and reamortize the loan.  Otherwise all your additional payment will do is change the amount due on your next payment, or push out your next payment due date. Regarding interest calculation, you owe interest on the principle outstanding.  Say you have a 10 year loan (120 Months), at 5% APR, and a $1,000 payment (this means you borrowed roughly $94,000) Each month the amount of interest owed reduces because there is less principle outstanding.  The reason loans are amortized like this is so the borrower has a predictable, known, monthly amount due.
There are deals out there which allow refinancing up to 125% of appraised value so long as you have a solid payment history. You need to research banks in your area working with HARP funded mortgages.  An alternate method is to find a bank that will finance 80% of the current value at 4% and the rest as a HELOC. The rate will be higher on the equity line, but the average rate will be better and you can pay the line off faster.