2007 Federal Income Taxes Knowledge Base
If i paid federal income taxes through my jobs in 2007, do i get the $600 tax rebate? im 17, i work at target, since july of 2007, and worked at McDonalds through April 2007. and i paid Federal income taxes in both jobs, so if the proposal is passed, will i get $600?
Can I file a 2007 federal income tax return if I had no income? Yes, I'm asking because of the "refund." My only income per se for 2007, if it counts for any are my college loans/federal grants.
should i wait to get divorced from my wife untill i file 2007 income taxes? ive been married for 35 years and am now living with a new girlfriend, my ex's lawer insists that its to our advantage (finacial) to get out finances in order and wait for a divorce untill we file our 2007 federal income taxes.
Can I take a deduction on my 2007 income tax return for something that I paid in 2008? I just paid my state/local 2007 property taxes this month (Jan '08). Can I still take the deduction on my 2007 federal income tax return or do I need to take it on my 2008 return?
Can I clam my wife on my 2007 federal income tax as a dependent? My wife and I just got married last May. She came to the U.S around April and has never had a job in the U.S. She does have a green card and a work S.S.N. So can I file jointly and also claim her as a dependent???
Can I claim medical expenses that occurred in 2008 for 2007 taxes? I have already filed and paid 2007 federal income taxes. I just incurred a large medical bill that allowed a deduction amount that was higher than 7.5% of my AGI. Can I still claim this medical expense for tax year 2007 and amend my taxes? TIA
2007 Federal Income Tax Return - W2 Question? I'm about to file 2007 Federal tax return. But I have question before I submit my return to IRS (paper return, not online). I have copy (xerox copy) of W2 form. I misplaced my original W2 form that I got from my employer. My question is, Is it okay to submit xerox copy of W2 with my tax return to IRS? I want to confirm that to avoid any IRS penalties. Thank you, Samir
My daughter is 18 and filed her 2007 Income Taxes but I also claimed her as a dependant my taxes.? She made over 4,000.00 and paid approximately 200.00 in Federal Income Taxes. Is she eligible for the extra IRS refund?
2007 Federal Income Tax? Does anyone know where I could find the 2007 Federal Income Tax? I've already searched on www.irs.com but found nothing. If you know, please help!
2007 tax rebate - Will the fed tax rebates be subject to state/local income tax on our 2008 income tax forms? I moved in Jan 2008 from FL (no state income tax) to MD (has state/local income tax) - When I get my $600 federal income tax rebate check for 2007, will I have to report that as income on my 2008 state/local income tax forms, or is the Fed rebate exempt from being reported as income for 2008 ?
2005 income tax increase and paid in 2007, can I deduct from 2007 income tax return? I received the notice from IRS in 2007 for an error on my 2005 Federal income tax return, as a result, I paid about $1300... $950 for 2005 tax underpayment, $200 for penalties, and $150 for interest. I made payment in 2007, can I include any of these on my 2007 federal income tax return? Thanks
Regard Federal Income Tax Rebate, 2007? I am a 44 year old female. I have been collecting FED. SSI for 14 yrs. It was my understanding that I was not qualified to receive the refund; being, I do not pay/file Fed. income tax. Anybody out there a Fed. Tax Man? I certainly could use the $300. However, I'm not Looking For a Hand Out! Thanks. God Bless You and Yours!!
what is the non-exempt portion of your federal income tax refund? i have had to file bankruptcy and the u.s bankruptcy court states i have to turnover half of the non exempt portion of my 2007 state and federal income tax refunds. spoke with lawyer, and he told me that its basically half, but failed to answer my question.
I was paid disability all of 2007. Do I still have to file state and federal income tax ? had a severe head injury and was paid disability through all of 2007. I have no usual w-2 forms. Do I file/claim this?
Do I have to file a federal income tax return? I'm a college freshmen and I completed my FAFSA in February. I'm 17 and will be 18 on March 14th. I am also a dependent. I don't work, I live with my mom and she works b/c I was still 17. I might work this summer b/c I'll be 18. Anyway, i just noticed that my University requires me to fill out this verification thing. And they request that I attach a signed copy of mine and my mom's 2007 federal income tax return and W-2s if possible. Was I suppose to file one of those? I have a copy of my mom's. But do dependents have to file their own even if they don't work. And the thing is, I'm going to be 18 when I turn this into my financial aid counselor so would she expect for me to have turned this in?
Do I receive less financial aid if I have student income? I earned about $2000 in 2007. I was a dependent when i earned that money. I am now 18. I didnt submit a 2007 federal income tax return. But if i did would it have hurt my chances of earning financial aid?
How are your yearly federal taxes calculated? Will my 2007 income tax be determined through my last paycheck of the year or through the last day of earned income in 2007?
Are real estate classes tax deductable in the Educational deductions for Federal Income Taxes? For 2007 are real estate classes deductable?
Should I have a 1099-G form for 2007 Federal Tax Refunds? Can't find one. Are federal tax refunds from 2007 taxable as income on my 2008 tax returns? If I can't find a 1099-G, I should just be able to enter in the amount of my 2007 federal tax refund, correct?
May have forgot to claim 2006 refund as income on 2007 income taxes.? I think I forgot to add in the income from my 2006 refund to my 2007 income(for both State and Federal). How can I be sure? If I did make a mistake how do I fix it and how much in penalties would I have to pay...my refund was for about 800 dollars, I don't recall exactly. I used the EZ forms for both years taking the standard deduction.
Will you refuse to pay your federal income tax? Many of those who oppose the war say they should not be made to help pay for it. If you are one of those, will you refuse to file a federal income tax return for 2007?
How do I file federal and state tax for 2007 with W2 income and "S" corp expenses? In 2007, I had revenue through 2 employers and expenses from 2 "S" corporations (One for me and one for my wife). Both "S" corps did not have any revenue. Which form should I use to file taxes or am I better off spending the money on a tax accountant
overpaid state income tax itemized into federal deductions. any way to fix this year instead of next year? When overpaid state income tax is itemized into the federal deduction, I get back federal money I'm not technically entitled to. Next year I will have to report the state refund and pay federal taxes on it. 1) Will I have to report the 2006 state refund only if I itemize on the 2007 tax return? If yes, great (though doesn't make much sense), if not, where will it be reported? 2) Is there a way to adjust my federal taxes this year so that I don't get back this federal money now and don't have to report state refund next year? If yes, how? I was hoping for something on Schedule A, but I don't see it. Thanks. Ok I see the answer to #1 -- it's like 10 on the 1040. Thanks, Bill. But why would I have to amend my return? I haven't filed it yet. I will know exactly what all the amounts are before I file, I just don't know how to adjust my itemized deductions. crazydave -- your answer to my #2 doesn't apply because if I receive a refund for 2006 taxes, I have to report it on my 2007 tax return. Withholding won't change that. And no, I don't need to adjust anything -- this year is a special case and I didn't know I'll itemize until November. The actual problem is that I plan to be in a higher tax bracket in 2007, so if I have to pay tax on my refund I will simply lose a small chunk of money. skip -- yes, it's legitimate, and not just for 2006, it's also for 2007. I think people are having a hard time reading the years in my question, but they are correct, you just need to pay attention -- I refer to the 2006 tax return as the one due April 15 2007, and the 2007 tax return as the one due April 15 2008. You said that "The clawback is to the extent of the tax benefit received." But according to my estimates it is not. Example -- if my state refund is $100, then I will save $25 this year (because that $100 is part of itemized deductions under "state taxes paid"), but I will pay $28 next year.(because the refund will be reported on the tax return as income). It's too late to adjust anything for this year, and there won't be any need next year. I am going to itemize, there's no question about it. I just want to itemize in such a way that my state tax refund is included in the federal calculation. Generally federal is calculated first, then propagated to the state forms. I need the info on the state form to make it back to federal. I want to pay the proper federal tax with my 2006 return, not with my 2007 return. Clarification for Judy -- 12% interest (~ 28/25) is a little too high, especially considering that I know all this in advance. There's gotta be a way to fix it, does no one know....
I had no federal tax liability for 2007 based on my income and dependent status.? i am married and my wife does not work. I have 2 additional dependents. I had no tax liability for 2007 and did receive a tax refund based on my income. Will I receive a check from the IRS in the spring from the stimulus program ($1200 couples + $300 per dependent)?
I worked a small time in 2007 only had 34.51 takin out for Federal Income, do I need to file taxes? If so I have 1 dependent my son, I made $541.89 HOW much will I possible get back in tax return. Just an est. Best answer get 10 points today. EXAMPLE: $900, $800, $1200
If I owe $300 (2007) state income tax and am expecting a $2500 (2008) Federal return will the fed just deduct? the state taxes i owe?
Federal income tax for 2000 vs. 2007? According to the IRS 1040 Instructions for 2007, a married couple paid 10% on their first $15650 of taxable income, and 15% on their taxable income over $15650 but less than $63700. According to the IRS 1040 Instructions for 2000, a married couple paid 15% on their taxable income under $43850. What was the tax for a married couple with taxable income of $40,000 in 2000? In 2007? How much money has the tax decreased? According to the IRS 1040 Instructions for 2007, a married couple paid $98355.50 plus 35% of the portion of their income over $349700. According to the IRS 1040 Instructions for 2000, a married couple paid $86854.50 plus 39.4% of the portion of their income over $288350. What was the tax for a married couple with taxable income of $4,000,000 in 2000? In 2007? How much money has the tax decreased?
Hi. I am a Michigan state resident where I had no income in 2007 (new mom lucky enough to stay home 1st year) I did have one job in NY state (no state taxes taken out). I filed my 2007 federal taxes. My question is: do I have to file any state taxes this year (MI or NY)? Thank you all so much!
I lived in OH & wife lived in KY for 2007. Trying to file federal taxes jointly.? I lived & worked in OH & wife lived & worked in KY for 2007. Got married late december. I have a higher income. Trying to file federal taxes jointly. Don't want to pay taxes to OH and KY for incomes not earned there. How do we do this?
What amount of my salary should be deducted for federal income tax? I am married with only my spouse as a dependent. I am retired military and my spouse works. I have a job earning 40K for 2007 and had only 4k deducted from my salary for federal taxes. Should I adjust my W-4 for 2009 to have more taxes so that I won't owe so much at the end of the year?
Can you provide the Federal Income tax rates for 2000 and 2007? NS Joe.. I want them posted on Y/A so this nonsense of only for the rich can be disproven. Thewindywest: Just some more evidence that libs avoid fact based questions like the plaque. The are so F'in pathetic always looking for their "parrot" answers..
How do I get back Estimated Tax Payments made previously if I owe no taxes this year? A friend, who is older, had been living under low income and not having to pay federal income taxes. In 2007, she took a large disbursement from an annuity and had to pay high taxes on it. Following this, the IRS wanted her to pay estimated tax payments throughout 2008. She did. However, she took no distributions and owes no taxes for 2008....so how does she get back the money she paid in estimated payments throughout 2008.
How do I amend my 2007 Income Tax return (Form 1040X? I have a problem and let's just say that am quite out of knowledge on how to go about filling in Form 1040X from the IRS website. I need assistance here because I am so desperate like right about now. Well, I failed to disclose my full income and federal/state/local taxes withheld for 2007. It was my very first time to file taxes and so, coming to know of the very many cases in which tax preparers trick unsuspecting tax payers out there in trying to defraud the IRS by putting in unwarranted deductions to get bigger refunds, I decided to file my taxes online by myself (I used "Intuit/Turbotax" because it's easy to follow their instructions on filing). Anyway, I thought that a person could file returns on every W-2 that is received from the employer and that was the grievous mistake I made. I ended up filing only once (as is the lawful case) but with only one employer in lieu of 4. Now am required by the IRS to fill in Form 1040X and it's so confusing, I'd rather do statistics at MIT! I don't even have a 'hard copy' of my 2007 return since I did it electronically and TurboTax only shows a summary of my AGI, taxes withheld and overpayment (refund) or underpayment (tax liability). Going to Jackson Hewitt is like $ 300 (for what?) and HRBlock isn't that cost-friendly either so I need assistance from a person who's done an amendment before to hastily come to my aid or else the IRS will start to "breathe down my neck" and who wants that for the love of life? Help! - Andrew -
Do retired people with no earned income get the 2007 tax rebate? Example: Retired couple AGI of $87,000 with no earned income.Paid $9700 federal tax.
Can I still deduct state & local taxes like I have the past couple years? We have no state income tax in FL.? The past couple years I know I've been able to deduct a certain amount of taxes on a Schedule A (Itemized Deductions) line 5 for State and Local Income Taxes. If you don't have all your receipts they gave you a certain amount (from a table) based off your income. I've gone through my taxes online this year and I'm not finding where this same deduction is available? Has this item expired? Or am I missing something? Anyone done their Federal Income taxes for 2007 found this to be true? Thanks! (Obviously we don't pay state income tax in FL.) PS - I'm using H&R Block TaxCut...and I've gone through it several times and it's not coming up! I used this product last year and it worked fine. This year I'm starting to worry!
Do I file a separate federal income tax return for my MLM business? I started a MLM business in November 2007. When I file my taxes do I have to file separately for the business. It is all under my social security number. Just want to stay on the right side of the law. Thanks
How can i end up paying less federal income tax? Hello folk Me and my wife are about to make around $75000 this year(Apr 2006-March 2007).I just wanted to know is there any way we can save federal tax we have to pay on it.I mean where should i invest money. We dont have any dependent. We dont own house.I wont like to buy house at this stage cause i am not sure this incom will be go on for next year... Please suggest me from your experience. Thanks in Advance
How much income did you have to make or pay in taxes to receive $600 back from the stimulus package?. Confused I rec'd letter from the IRS saying according to my filing status I would receive $600 or my 2007 net income tax liability which ever is less. I paid in close to $5,000 in federal tax 2007. But I only rec'd $300. Have a friend @ work same situtation as me and she rec'd $600. Single, home owner just about same income. You can't get answers from the IRS. they are too busy on the phone and the web site doesn't offer a place to ask questions. Appreciate your help. Thanks.
May I claim my non-refundable federal credits in Canada when filing my 2008 income tax return in 2009? Hello I was feeling so overwhelmed when I read a lot of topics that regards to filing Canadian income tax return. I came here in US last July 2008 as a visitor and got married suddenly without any plan at all. Right now, I'm adjusting my status and it's still pending in USCIS. I worked in Canada from January 2008 to July 2008. Since I came here in US, I have zero US income. Based on the instructions and determination of my residency, I'm a resident of Canada for tax purposes because I accumulated 201 days in Canada. All of my income is 100 % from Canada and 0 US income. When filing 2008 income tax return may I claim all of my non-refundable federal tax for 2008 as long as I'm going to write a statement that I want to claim them all? How about my non-refundable federal tax from previous years may I claim them all as well. I was a college student in Canada from August 2006 to May 2008. Most of my non-refundable federal tax was coming from my tuition when I was in college. When I filed my 2007 income tax return my non-refundable federal tax was about $7,000.00 Canadian. Can I claim them all? What do I do...if I can claim them all it's really a big help for us since today's economy is getting poor. Do you have any inputs if how I can do this? Thank you so much in advance. Have a great and safe holidays to all of us!!! Advance Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
How does the underpayment of IRS federal income tax work? Say for instance that my 2006 taxes are fully paid. Yet for 2007 after I file for my return next year in april that it turns out I underpaid by 2000 dollars. Will I owe the IRS a penalty for this? Second senario. Say that for 2006 my taxes are fully paid. But for 2007 I am also getting a tax return of around 100 dollars because of all my deductions such as charity, real estate tax and interest etc. Even though I technically underpaid the IRS before the deductions, after the deductions are accounted for I still have a return. Will I owe any penalty for underpaying before the deductions are accounted for? Please let me know what my consequences are for both senarios. I want to clarify Senario 1. I mean that if I am fully paid for tax year 2006 but when I am filing for 2007 it shows I underpaid for 2007 not 2006. Again 2006 is fully paid. I'm just speaking of 2007 is underpaid. I heard if you are fully paid for the prevoius year then it doesn't matter if you underpaid for the current year when you file.
If I had no taxes withheld during 2007, do I still have to file state taxes or just federal taxes? I get benefit from the federal taxes, I don't owe any taxes to the state (low income- many dependents), but i'm doing this for the first time by my self, and I'm not sure if I have to.
US federal income tax question—minor with income? I have 17-year-old who worked in 2007. He earned less than $3,000 so he’s not required to file taxes. We plan to claim him as a dependant on our taxes. Do we have to include his earnings in our income? Will he still be able to file taxes on his own claiming zero dependants? Even though he doesn’t have to file, we think if he does, he might get a refund of the taxes he paid.
Should we do away with the federal income tax? Flipping through my congressman's essays, I came across a very interesting passing remark he made. "But could America exist without an income tax? The idea seems radical, yet in truth America did just fine without a federal income tax for the first 126 years of her history. Prior to 1913, the government operated with revenues raised through tariffs, excise taxes, and property taxes, without ever touching a worker's paycheck. Even today, individual income taxes account for only approximately one-third of federal revenue. Eliminating one-third of the proposed 2007 budget would still leave federal spending at roughly $1.8 trillion-- a sum greater than the budget just 6 years ago in 2000! Does anyone seriously believe we could not find ways to cut spending back to 2000 levels?" - Ron Paul, R-Texas full text here: http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2006/tst041006.htm
income and federal taxes? HAVE NOT PAID INCOME OR STATE CAN I GET PENALIZED AND IF I HAVE REFUND 2008 WILL GO TO 2007 BACK TAXES
What exactly am I supposed to send.... reguarding the U.S income tax return? The university asks for "A signed copy of the 2007 federal income tax return, including all schedule and W-2's" so just the little W-2 form, the 1040 Form and the schedule C-EZ, Schedule SE, and Schedule EIC? what about the forms labeled- 8812 (Add. child tax credit), the IT-201 Form (Resident income tax return) and the IT-213 (Claim for Empire State Child Credit) Thanks, I'm really confused btw, its my parents' income tax forms
Federal tax income???? (Status: Married and no kids or any dependents)? I am married and claimed 2 allowances in my W-4 in 2007. My wife also claims 2 allowances in her W-4. I work temporary for 2-3 months in a year (i worked for 2 different jobs in 2007) and my wife has a full-time and permanent job. This year's tax return filling shows that we owe federal income tax. After i observed my previous paystubs in 2007, i found out: 1. Why sometimes in my 2007 paycheck did not withhold federal income tax when i claimed for married and 2 allowances? 2. This year (2008), i already adjusted my W-4 by just claiming 1 allowance and only has one temporary job that may only for 2 month length. Does my wife need to adjust too to claim 1 allowance, so we will not owe Federal Income Tax for next year (2009) tax return? 3. Or is it the best way i claim for 0 allowance since i just have a temporary job for a short time period and my wife stays claiming 2 allowances since she has a permanent and full-time job? Which way it is the best, please help me to know?
i had no income in2006 & 2007 how do i file for 2006 federal tax i already filed for 2007? i am disabled and am now receiving disablity income as of this year
Should I amend my FEDERAL return to report the local income tax refund of $22.00? My wife and I filed our 2006 Federal income tax returns two months ago. We recently filed our local income tax returns and got a unexpected $22.00 return that we had not reported on our Federal return. The local authority issued us a 1099-G that stated this income is being reported to the IRS for tax year 2006 (not 2007). Should we go through the hassle of amending our 2006 returns for this small amount, or should we wait to see if the IRS sends us correspondence asking us to pay the tax on the $22.00? Thanks, Folks - the $22 says for tax year 2006. This is all for 2006, not 2005 or 2007. We itemized our Federal returns and got back about $3,200.
2007 Federal Tax Rate question? i am confused on the rates for this year. it shows different percentages for how much you you will owe, that i understand, but what does it mean when they also add ex amount of dollars on top of the percentage? ex: taxable income $31,850 - $77,100 (the tax is) $4,386.25 plus 25% of the amount over 31,850 what is the extra $4,386.25 for? & how does it interfer with your income? thanks <33333 (best nswer will get 10 points + a tumbs up!) i have the link so you can see what im talking about http://www.irs.gov/formspubs/article/0,,id=164272,00.html
Do you know the facts on taxes? Tax Facts Taking a look at government bucks. By Bruce Bartlett Just in time for tax-filing season, the Tax Foundation and the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation have compiled some useful facts about the federal tax system. Following are a few worth thinking about as taxpayers write their annual checks to Uncle Sam. In 2005, the federal government took $2.4 trillion out of the pockets of the American people. To put this number into context, it is about the same as the size of the entire U.S. economy in 1959 in inflation-adjusted terms. Only two other countries on earth have economies as large as our federal government: Germany and Japan — and Germany just barely makes the cut, with a gross domestic product of $2.7 trillion. China, which everyone is so alarmed about, has an economy significantly smaller than the federal government, with a GDP of $1.9 trillion — about equal to what the United States raises just from taxes on individuals. Contrary to popular belief, the vast bulk of federal taxes are paid by the wealthy. According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, in 2006, 53.7 percent of all federal income taxes were paid by those with incomes over $200,000. Those with incomes between $100,000 and $200,000 paid 28.3 percent of all individual income taxes. Thus those with incomes over $100,000 paid 82 percent of the total. They also paid 44.4 percent of all payroll taxes. Those with incomes below $40,000 paid no federal income taxes at all in the aggregate. The positive liability for those who paid anything was more than offset by tax rebates from the Earned Income Tax Credit for many more who paid nothing. In total, the EITC put $41 billion into the pockets of low-income workers in 2005, 91 percent of it being paid to those with no income tax liability. However, according to the Tax Foundation, three-fifths of Americans believe that it is wrong for anyone to pay no taxes at all, that everyone should pay something to finance the government. So-called tax loopholes — deductions and exclusions that reduce one's tax liability — are mainly used by the middle class, not the wealthy. The largest tax expenditures are the exclusions for pension contributions and health benefits for workers. Among the largest deductions are those for mortgage interest and state and local taxes. In 2005, taxpayers saved $62 billion in taxes due to the mortgage interest deduction, with 72 percent of that going to those with incomes below $200,000. The child credit saved taxpayers $46 billion — almost all of it claimed by the middle class. Just $8 million went to those with incomes over $200,000. Not surprisingly, three-fifths of taxpayers believe their taxes are too high. Only 2 percent think they are too low. About a third of taxpayers would support a reduction in government services in order to achieve further tax cuts. Just 8 percent favor bigger government financed with higher taxes. Support for fundamental tax reform is high. Four-fifths of taxpayers believe that the tax system is too complex. Just 3 percent believe the tax system is fine the way it is. By better than a two-to-one margin, taxpayers would be willing to give up major tax deductions, such as that for mortgage interest or state and local taxes, in order to get lower income tax rates. Almost all taxpayers think that the top federal income-tax rate of 35 percent is too high. More than 90 percent of taxpayers believe that the top rate should be no higher than 29 percent, with 70 percent saying that 19 percent should be the maximum. The Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) is a rapidly growing federal tax. Originally designed to tax only the rich, increasingly it is a tax on the middle class. In 2005, the AMT affected only 1.3 percent of those with incomes between $50,000 and $100,000. Unless Congress acts, this will rise to 42.8 percent this year and over 50 percent next year. This illustrates the problem with all soak-the-rich tax proposals — eventually, they end up taxing the middle class, too. For years, Republicans have largely ignored the problem of the AMT — enacting temporary patches to the tax cut to keep the problem from getting worse, but not even attempting to offer a permanent fix. The latest patch expired at the end of last year, which is why there is such a sharp rise projected in the percentage of taxpayers affected by the AMT. Consequently, Democrats really have a gun to their heads — they must do something on the AMT by the end of the year. But because they have pledged to pay for all tax cuts, they must raise taxes somehow to pay for an AMT fix. Republicans aren't likely to offer much help in that area, making tax policy in 2007 an interesting spectator sport.
Democrats: Middle-class tax relief a priority? they lie? Democrats: Middle-class tax relief a priority Story Highlights • Democrats vow push to keep middle class from paying tax intended for wealthy • Change would cost at least $50 billion a year at a time of budget deficits • Bush proposes another one-year fix in his 2008 budget submission to Congress • White House budget director: "It's a harder issue than it seems" WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- As millions of Americans rush to file their annual income tax returns before the April 17 deadline, Democrats promised to push to keep middle-class families from paying a tax originally intended for the very wealthy. The alternative minimum tax, initially intended to ensure that the rich could not take so many deductions and credits that they paid no federal income taxes, will hit some 23 million taxpayers next spring when they file their 2007 income tax returns unless Congress takes action. "This tax now affects schoolteachers, firefighters, police officers. It was never intended to be that way," said Rep. Rahm Emanuel, an Illinois Democrat who sits on the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee in the U.S. House of Representatives. "Middle-class families making between $75,000 and $100,000 are now more likely this year to pay the tax than those making more than a million dollars," Emanuel said in the weekly Democratic radio address Saturday. Congress has been enacting a series of temporary measures to keep more middle- and upper middle-income taxpayers from paying the AMT, and President Bush proposed another one-year fix in his 2008 budget submission to Congress. House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel has said he will push for permanent AMT relief for those taxpayers who were never meant to pay it. The problem is a cost of at least $50 billion a year to the federal Treasury at a time of war outlays and big budget deficits. About 4 million taxpayers paid the AMT in 2005, according to the latest available data from the Internal Revenue Service. That number could grow to 30 million in a few years. White House Budget Director Rob Portman told Reuters last week he would like to see a long-term fix to the AMT, but acknowledged the difficulty. "It's a harder issue than it seems," he said. House Democrats want a solution that does not add to the deficits, and that will mean raising revenue by closing tax loopholes and possibly raising taxes on others, which would make it hard to win support from congressional Republicans. "We will work with our Republican colleagues to identify bipartisan solutions that help middle-class families avoid this tax that was never intended for them," Emanuel said. "This is the one thing on which Democrats and Republicans should agree." Emanuel also said reforming the AMT, which forces people to calculate their taxes under two different sets of rules, would be a major step forward in simplifying the tax code. Copyright 2007 Reuters. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. These tax rate schedules are provided so that you can compute your estimated tax for 2005. To compute your actual income tax, please see the instructions for 2005 Form 1040, 1040A, or 1040EZ as appropriate when they are available. ________________________________________ Schedule X — Single If taxable income is over--But not over--The tax is: $0$7,30010% of the amount over $0 $7,300$29,700$730 plus 15% of the amount over 7,300 $29,700$71,950$4,090.00 plus 25% of the amount over 29,700 $71,950$150,150$14,652.50 plus 28% of the amount over 71,950 $150,150$326,450$36,548.50 plus 33% of the amount over 150,150 $326,450no limit$94,727.50 plus 35% of the amount over 326,450 Schedule Y-1 — Married Filing Jointly or Qualifying Widow(er) If taxable income is over--But not over--The tax is: $0$14,60010% of the amount over $0 $14,600$59,400$1,460.00 plus 15% of the amount over 14,600 $59,400$119,950$8,180 plus 25% of the amount over 59,400 $119,950$182,800$23,317.50 plus 28% of the amount over 119,950 $182,800$326,450$40,915.50 plus 33% of the amount over 182,800 $326,450no limit$88,320.00 plus 35% of the amount over 326,450 Schedule Y-2 — Married Filing Separately If taxable income is over--But not over--The tax is: $0$7,30010% of the amount over $0 $7,300$29,700$730 plus 15% of the amount over 7,300 $29,700$59,975$4,090 plus 25% of the amount over 29,700 $59,975$91,400$11,658.75 plus 28% of the amount over 59,975 $91,400$163,225$20,457.75 plus 33% of the amount over 91,400 $163,225no limit$44,160.00 plus 35% of the amount over 163,225 Schedule Z — Head of Household If taxable income is over--But not over--The tax is: $0$10,45010% of the amount over $0 $10,450$39,800$1,045 plus 15% of the amount over 10,450 $39,800$102,800$5,447.50 plus 25% of the amount over 39,800 $102,800$166,450$21,197.50 plus 28% of the amount over 102,800 $166,450$326,450$39,019.50 plus 33% of the amount over 166,450 $326,450no limit$91,819.50 plus 35% of the amount over 326,450
Avoiding double state income taxation (CA/AR) when married but living seperately? **Note: This is not due to a divorce or a legal seperation** As unconventional as our situation is, in June of 2007 my wife moved out of California to Arkansas because of a fantastic job opportunity and depending on how it goes she could be there 2-3 years or even longer. Anyway, long story short, I'm lacking options of how to avoid paying taxes on her non-resident portion of income in both CA and AR because, as many of you Californians know, the state loves to get their slice of pie no matter where the income is earned. Also, with two exceptions, California requires the filing status to be the same as filed under Federal income taxes. So, it appears we are unable to file jointly at federal level and seperate at state level (in CA). Are we really stuck unfairly over-paying our taxes to the "lesser of two evils" degree? There must be other couples in a similar situation of following the money during the career building years. Thanks for your time and consideration.
Can anyone help with this accounting problem? Web World Magazine Inc sold 6,900 subscriptions for $30 during December 2007. The business had taxable income of 120,000 during the first calender quarter of 2008. The federal tax rate is 35%. A quarterly tax payment will be made in April 2008. Prepare a current liabilities section of the balance sheet for the company on March 31, 2008
hedge-fund managers are consistent Democratic donors.? Hedging Your Votes Taxing questions. Democrats have so far gotten the lion’s share of hedge-fund managers’ campaign contributions in the 2008 presidential money race — 75 percent, according to a Center for Responsive Politics/Absolute Return magazine analysis of the candidates’ first-quarter financials. Next week, when financials are due, we’ll know if the trend kept up in the second quarter. For now the more interesting question is: Will it continue after the Democrats raise taxes on private-equity and hedge-fund managers, as they appear determined to do? Last Wednesday, the Senate Finance Committee held a hearing on “carried interest” — the percentage of a fund’s returns that its managers keep as compensation. This comes after 14 House Democrats proposed a bill that would more than double the taxes that fund managers pay on these fees. Your typical fund manager takes around two percent of the fund’s value as a fee for managing the money, and on this he pays regular income tax of up to 35 percent. In addition, he keeps around 20 percent of the returns on the fund’s investments — on this he pays the capital-gains tax rate, which President Bush cut to 15 percent in 2003. These funds are quite large, in the billions, and generate outsized returns, so these guys have been in the news lately for their astronomical take-home pay. Now the Democrats want their cut. They say it’s not fair that these managers pay such a low rate on so much income. They want them to pay the regular income-tax rate — 35 percent. Here’s where things get weird. Typically political parties crack down on the other party’s donors, not their own. But unlike their financial brethren in the greater securities/investments community, hedge-fund managers are consistent Democratic donors. While the industry overall only shifted its giving to the Democrats in 2006 when a power-shift looked all-but-certain, CRP/Absolute Return data show that hedge funds have favored Democrats for longer and by wider margins. In 2006 hedge funds gave 69 percent of their campaign cash to Democrats (the industry overall was more closely divided at 53-45). They gave 67 percent to Democrats in 2004. In 2002, it was 84 percent. As mentioned above, first-quarter filings from the 2008 presidential candidates show that the funds continue to favor Democrats. Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd received the most — close to $350,000 — which reflects the large number of hedge funds in his state as well as his position as chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. John Edwards came in second with over $190,000. Almost all of that money came from the Fortress Investment Group, which also paid him close to $500,000 in consulting fees last year. (Edwards told the Associated Press that he took the job “primarily to learn” about financial markets and their relationship to poverty.) Hillary Clinton came in third, followed by Rudy Giuliani and then Barack Obama. A top Republican fundraiser I talked to simply didn’t believe these numbers could be accurate. He pointed to a number of high-profile hedge-fund managers who have given to Republicans, such as Paul E. Singer, a founding partner at Elliott Associates and major Giuliani backer. When I asked him to assume that the numbers were correct for argument’s sake, he said, “Then it would be the stupidest thing I could imagine.” Evidence that hedge-fund giving runs counter to the sector’s best interest also comes from the fact that the Managed Funds Association, which represents hedge funds in Washington, directs most of its giving to Republicans. In 2004 the split was 68-32. Even in 2006, with the rest of the industry trending Democratic, the MFA favored the GOP 57-41. CRP executive director Sheila Krumholz says, “The Managed Funds Association is a good example of a business association giving for more pragmatic reasons, based on its legislative agenda and more in the general interest of these firms. Yet many companies,” she says, “even members of the association, give 100 percent to Democrats.” Avenue Capital Group, D.E. Shaw, Farallon, Fortress, and yes, Soros Fund Management are among the major Democratic donors who populate the association’s membership list. One can think of several reasons why hedge-fund giving is so at odds to what one would perceive to be the best interest of the industry. First, most hedge funds are located in blue states and therefore represented by Democrats. It probably makes sense for these managers to give to a Chris Dodd, a Hillary Clinton, a Nancy Pelosi, even if they don’t share their ideologies. That could skew the data. But a closer look at the giving patterns of some of the top donors finds political contributions spread out over a large number of Democratic candidates and PACs. Thomas F. Steyer, senior partner at Farallon Capital Management in San Francisco, gave $1,000 to Nancy Pelosi (and $5,000 to her PAC), sure. But he’s given tens of thousands more to other Democrats, running the gamut from the hawkish Joe Lieberman to the very liberal Russell Feingold. Not all hedge funds are located in blue states, either. David Bonderman, a big Democratic donor, runs the Texas Pacific Group from Fort Worth, Texas. Second, one could argue that influential lawmakers from both parties support higher taxes and more regulation on hedge funds, so it doesn’t matter whether they give to Republicans or Democrats. Iowa Republican Charles Grassley, ranking member on the Senate Finance Committee, has long favored forcing hedge funds to register with the Securities and Exchange Commission, something they argue they shouldn’t have to do. And in a statement at Wednesday’s hearing, Grassley defended the idea of raising taxes on publicly traded partnerships like Fortress and Blackstone. But this explanation is also lacking. It is the Democratic party, not the GOP, that seeks to roll back Bush’s investment-friendly tax cuts on dividends and capital gains. Carried interest and hedge-fund managers are merely the softest targets in what promises to be a broader Democratic attack on the Bush tax cuts. The fundamental logic — that the investor class is overcompensated and ought to pay more — is the same. Listening to the Democratic vs. the Republican candidates for president provides an even clearer demonstration of the difference between the parties. John Edwards, ardent student of the industry though he may be, has come out in favor of higher taxation and increased regulation of private-equity and hedge funds. And Thursday the New York Sun reported that Barack Obama has also come out in support of doubling taxes on publicly traded partnerships. Hillary Clinton, who along with Chuck Schumer represents Wall Street in the Senate, is the only holdout so far (a spokesman told the Sun she is still “evaluating” the issue). This bit of politically-motivated reticence aside, the Democrats’ track record on taxes speaks for itself. By any measure of common sense, a smart man would bet on the GOP to keep taxes low and capital deregulated. Finally, there’s the Soros factor. But while this can partially explain large discrepancies in past cycles, particularly 2004, Soros’s pocketbook was silent during the first quarter of 2007, and the Democrats dominated anyway. What’s left is the explanation offered by CRP’s Krumholz: “I sense that, for these individuals, a lot of them are ideologically allied with the Democrats possibly in spite of economic interests that would seem to favor a Republican alliance.” In other words, it’s Thomas Frank’s What’s the Matter With Kansas, only in reverse. Hedge-fund managers tend to live near the top of cosmopolitan, culturally liberal societies. They tend to find Republican positions on embryo-destroying stem-cell research and gay marriage to be nothing short of primitive. They tend to be extremely bright and thus prone to the fallacious idea that if more people like them ran the government, they could solve just about any problem with a new government program. They can afford higher taxes. Unfortunately, the rest of America can’t. Investment capital is the lifeblood of business expansion and job creation, and the idea that Congress can’t find offsets in the bloated federal budget and must raid Wall Street for more money is preposterous. I know — no one deserves to have their taxes raised quite like these extremely well-compensated benefactors of the party that seeks to destroy them. However, as usual, it’s up to conservatives to know better.
under current laws the deduction for exemptions may be totally phaset out.? Federal income tax 2007
Question about federal income tax withholding? My husband claims 5 dependents on his federal income tax return however throughout the year he claims 2 on his paycheck. He is expecting a $10,000 bonus check next month so my question id should he change his withholding to 5 dependents just for the bonus then go back to 2 for the rest of the year so they do not take out a huge chunk in taxes. In 2007 he made $36,500 he is expecting to make between $50,000 - $55,000 in 2008. We usually get back about $7.500 in tax refund. So if he claims 5 dependents for the bonus check will it just kinda break even as far as tax refund next year? Any help with this would be great thanks last year he received $3500.00 and brought home $2236.00 if that helps any thanks
Question about federal tax withholding? My husband claims 5 dependents on his federal income tax return however throughout the year he claims 2 on his paycheck. He is expecting a $10,000 bonus check next month so my question id should he change his withholding to 5 dependents just for the bonus then go back to 2 for the rest of the year so they do not take out a huge chunk in taxes. In 2007 he made $36,500 he is expecting to make between $50,000 - $55,000 in 2008. We usually get back about $7.500 in tax refund. So if he claims 5 dependents for the bonus check will it just kinda break even as far as tax refund next year? Any help with this would be great thanks his bonus last year was $3500 and he brought home $2236.00 if that help any
How much should I have paid in Estimated Taxes for 2007? I am a self-employed college student and made less than $350 in 2006 and made between $10,000-$15000 in 2007. I was reading the 1040ES and it says this: "You do not have to pay estimated tax for 2007 if you were a U.S. citizen or resident alien for all of 2006 and you had no tax liability for the full 2006 tax year. You had no tax liability for 2006 if your total tax was zero or you did not have to file an income tax return." I was a citizen for all of 2006 and received back every bit of Federal Income Tax paid. I worked for about a month at a grocery store. Does this mean I won't have to pay penalties/interest for failure to file/underpayment for 2007? I believe I satisfy the requirements for an exception. Thanks
Minor Income taxes? So its tax season and i am wondering if i have to pay taxes or get money back my total income from feb2007 -0ct 2007 was about 4,000$ working part time i did claim 0 and i am only 17 years old and i heard bush is giving out 800$ part of the refund am i eligible to reacive that 800 bucks and i still stay with my parents federal income taxes took out like almost 300$ from my paychecks I stay in California
What does the word "Federal" really mean? Sorry that it was entered twice---do not have space to give you the research you can do for yourself----Common sense tells you that if your payment of income tax check is deposited somewhere other than to the account of the United States of America Treasury, something is wrong. Look at the endorsement on the back of same. Sorry that it was entered twice---do not have space to give you the research you can do for yourself----Common sense tells you that if your payment of income tax check is deposited somewhere other than to the account of the United States of America Treasury, something is wrong. Look at the endorsement on the back of same. This question has as yet no answer---- What does "Federal" really mean? Moderator should post---No Best Answer.
Questioning my 2007 tax return numbers? Can someone please explain to me why my return for 2007 is so low compared to my 2006 return? I'm so confused... 2006 W-2 statement [filed jointly since I got married, but while I was working at this job I was listed as single, no dependents]: 1 (Wages, tips, other comp) = 5012.86 2 (Federal income tax withheld) = 403.11 17 (State income tax for OH) = 48.68 2007 W-2 Statement [married, no kids]: 1 (Wages, tips, other comp) = 4895.24 2 (Federal income tax withheld) = 55.05 14 (Other) = 29.37 SDI 17 (State income tax for CA) = 25.03 Also, my husband and I are about to get divorced. We haven't filed any paperwork yet, should we file separately or together? Also, what does the Box 14 (Other) = 29.37 SDI mean? State disability insurance?! I'm not disabled though! .... wtf...
Do I have to claim my NYS income tax refund from 2006 on my 2007 tax return as income? I received a refund from NYS in 2007 for 2006 tax year. I keep reading that I do if I itemized my 2007 federal return. I did itemize vs. taking the standard deduction but in some cases it mentions did you itemize your state income tax return specifically. Why would I have to claim it as income if it is a refund owed to me by the state because I overpaid in taxes in the first place. This is also the first year I've heard this. I've always itemized and almost always get a small refund from the state. What changed this year or do I miss something? Help!
Can I contribute to a Roth IRA after filing Federal Income Tax but before April 25, 2008? Can I contribute to a Roth IRA after filing Federal Income Tax but before April 25, 2008? I'd like to file Income Tax as early as possible this year, say, first week in February but I'd like to wait to add money to my Roth IRA --for tax year 2007--, say no later than April 15, 2008. Is this o.k.? or do I have to add money to my Roth IRA before filing Income tax? Thanks, To add clarity: I would like to report on my 2007 Federal Income Tax Form that I've contributed to my Roth IRA. I'm thinking of actually making the contribution after I file but before April 2008 for tax year 2007. In the past few years, I've received some tax benefit for contributing to my Roth IRA. It's some kind of tax incentive for people to save money towards retirement. And I know that a traditional IRA is tax deductible.
Declared our foreign income but turbo tax says we get our US taxes refunded??? Is this right? Hi, I just did turbo tax for our 2007 taxes. My husband and I worked in the UK for part of 2006 & 2007. In turbo tax I put in all our dates and income earned overseas in 2007 and it filled in form 2555 for us. In the last part of 2007... My husband also earned $12, 500 in the USA as a salaried employee. He had state and federal taxes taken from his paycheck. I input all the details from his w2. Turbo tax says we will get a $1,116 federal refund and a $568 state refund...which is everything he paid to federal and state since he returned to the USA...does this sounds right as it seems to good to be true to me!!!! Any opinions are welcome. I just want a few before I e-file it!
Are all the tax liabilities (Fed Taxes 941/944, etc) I paid for my business tax deductible on my 2007 taxes? I'm wondering if I can claim all of my tax liabilities for my business on my 2007 taxes. I think I messed up on my 2006 taxes and didn't claim all of the tax liabilities I should have. I didn't claim the amount I spent on Federal Taxes (941/944), Federal Unemployment (940), CA SUI/ETT and CA PIT/SDI (Income Tax and State Disability Insurance).
W-2 wage and tax statement 2007 in Tennessee ?? My employer gave me a Form W-2 and Tax Statement 2007- on this page it showes that my 1.total income $3777.72 2. Federal Income Tax Withheld $246.34 3. Social Security Tax Withheld $234.20 4.Medicare Tax Withheld $54.80 and I work part-time, in highschool, don't own land or have a child or married !! Witch of 2,3,4 is the amount that I should receive back as a Tennessee Resident ?? I am 18yrs old !!
2007 State Tax Return - MA & RI? I am a bit unsure on filing my state income taxes for 2007. Up until September of 2007, I lived & worked 2 jobs in Rhode Island plus one job in Massachusetts. In September I left all 3 of those jobs & moved to Massachusetts & worked soley in Mass as well. I know I have to file my Federal taxes first & then file RI & MA as part-resident. I am a little confused when it comes to the part where I lived in RI & worked in MA, but now I live & work in MA-how do I file the MA taxes as a non-resident then a part-resident? Also, I know MA allows e-file, but is my situation to complicated for that? I don't have any other complicated deductions or credits, so I really don't want to have to pay some one to prepare my taxes since I have always done them myself. Any help would be greatly appreciated! Thanks!
Income Tax? I'm filling out my FAFSA form for next year. I'm going to be a grad student. It asks a question about the total income tax paid in 2007. What does that include is your total income tax, just federal tax or does it include Social Security and medicare tax too? I'm just wondering
Can I file 2006 federal and CA state taxes online then file 2007 online? My friend didn't file his 2006 income taxes. I wanted to file his 2007 online through the IRS links to H&R block but I need to file his 2006 first. Should I just have him mail the paper forms for both years? **Thanks for the response. I couldn't find any info on the IRS site about prior year efiling. So I'll just get the 2006 forms from the IRS and FTB sites and mail both years.
Making 36,500 & filing single with no dependents, $200 federal tax refund & breaking even with state sound ok? I just finished doing my own taxes with H&R Tax Cut and was sadly suprised to see a refund much less than what I expected. The federal income tax withheld from me in 2007 totaled almost $4000 and the state totaled about $1100. Last year was the first year that I worked in full so maybe that is why these figures are so shocking. In trying to get more money back the only thing I could think of was to file 2 different returns because I received 2 separate W-2's since my company was taken over in mid-2007. I'm pretty sure that's illegal too so I figured I'd check that with you guys too. And I do not own a home, vehicle, IRA, or anything else I think that will count as credits or deductions :( can't file head of household either. i live with family
Is an increase in Federal taxes normal for my paycheck in 2008? I am a salary paid employee at my company, so I was expecting the same income from 2007 to 2008, but when I received my paycheck, the net amount has recently dropped by a couple hundred. I do not make any more money than I did in 2007, I haven't changed my filing status either. Am I in a new tax bracket suddenly? I heard that the Fed cut rates and that would be better for me, but as it is, my salary pay is now lessened more by Federal Income Tax, Social Security and my two California Disability and California State Tax. Is this common for all states or is it just California? I am not sure, but I thought that an increase in state tax didn't increase my Federal Taxes, especially since I'm salaried and am making the exact amount as I always have been. When I asked the payroll accountant, he told me that this was normal for 2008 and I will probably get it back when I do taxes for 2008.... I feel like I'm being eaten away with tax! Any insight is appreciated! Thank you for your answers. To answer more specifics: - I have not changed ANYTHING about my filing status. I am single as I was before. - I haven't even started my Health Insurance plan with the small company yet. I understand California Disability and State tax increasing, but I have an additional $20 added to the bracket noted "Federal Income Tax" on my paystub. I will try to ask the accountant more succinctly why and get a better answer why I am being taxed. Hopefully, I will receive a better answer than, "You'll get it back later." This loss in just a couple hundred has caused me to have to relocate because I just can't keep up. I'm hoping to get a good answer for something serious... Thanks again for all the detailed answers!
Do I have to file a 2007 tax return to get the $600 tax rebate if no 2007 income and $20,000 2008 income? My 2007 income is $0. Thus, I was not going to file a federal tax return. But, my 2008 income will be approximately $20,000. Am I required to file a 2007 tax return in order to be eligible for the $600 tax rebate on my 2008 return? Or, will I automatically be eligible for the $600 rebate on my 2008 tax return even if I don't file a 2007 tax return? My 2007 income is $0. Thus, I am not going to file a 2007 federal tax return. But, my 2008 income will be approximately $20,000. Am I required to file a 2007 tax return in order to be eligible for the $600 tax rebate on my 2008 return? Or, will I automatically be eligible for the $600 rebate on my 2008 tax return even if I don't file a 2007 tax return? Additional clarification: I realize that I will not receive the rebate mailed out starting in May 2008 that is based on the 2007 tax return. I will get nothing until after I file my 2008 tax return. My question is whether I will be able to receive the $600 rebate when I file my 2008 tax return. My understanding is that I will not receive anything until after I file my 2008 tax return. At that point, I will be eligible for the $600 rebate since I haven't received it yet. My primary concern is whether I need to file a 2007 tax return or not in order to preserve my ability to collect the $600 on my 2008 return.
2007 Federal Tax Question? I have a guy who has the following: Form RRB 1099 Box 3 (Gross Social Security Equivalent) 19,644 Box 11(Medicare Premium) 1,122 Form 1099-R Box 3 (Employee Contributions) 27,107.14 Box 4 (Contributory Amount Paid) 5,972.16 Box 7 (Total Gross Paid) 5,972.16 Form 1099 DIV Box 1a (Total Ordinary Dividends) 28.28 Box 1b (Qualified Dividends) 28.28 Form 1099-INT Box 1 (Interest Income) 15,277.09 Form 1099-INT Box 1 (Interest Income) 1,330.97 Property Taxes paid 2,428.34 Mortgage Interest Paid 427.92 He is single and has no dependants What would his tax liability be?
I recieved a letter regarding my stimulus payment status, but I did not file my 2007 taxes.Is this possible? To be more specific, my mom runs a tax company, and she's got a lot of my information, so theres a possibility that she made my taxes without me knowing. [She denies it] Also, the letter mentions that the deposit of the stimulus payment may be sent to the same bank account as the federal income tax return. BUT, my mom basically controls my bank account [I have no control over it], and I recently found out that shes got a check book under my name. Is it possible for me to get the stimulus payment without supposedly filing my 2007 taxes, and is it possible for my mom to get the stimulus payment sent to her corporative account? Please, help! . Thank you so much for the help.
I made a mistake on my taxes, what do I do? I e-filed my 2007 federal and state taxes a couple of days ago. This was my first year of doing taxes and I didn't realize I would be receiving forms other than my W-2. Today I received a form from my school with information about a scholarship I received last year that I had completely forgot about and neglected to add as income in my federal taxes. Because I work super, super part-time, I am way under the line for having to pay taxes and am receiving all my withheld wages in my refund and this scholarship doesn't push me over this line. So, either way my refund is the same, but I'm sure I need to file an amended tax return. How do I do this? Will it cost me anything? How long will it delay my refund?
Why does Warren Buffett think his income taxes are too low? Aren't the rich suffering from disproportionate taxation? "The taxation system has tilted toward the rich and away from the middle class in the last 10 years," Buffett, the nation's third richest man, told Brokaw. Buffett said he did an informal survey of federal taxes paid by his own office staff, and the average was 32.9%, compared to his 17.7%. "There wasn't anybody in the office, from the receptionists on, that paid as low a tax rate," Buffett stated, noting that "I have no tax planning, I don't have an accountant, I don't have tax shelters." http://rawstory.com/news/2007/NBC_Warren_Buffett_wants_more_taxes_1030.html
Federal Taxes - What is Worksheet A / Worksheet B? I'm making corrections to my 2007-2008 Federal Appication for Student Federal Aid (FASFA). I know my 'Earned income', however, the FASFA asks for "Total Amount for Worksheet A" and "Total Amount for Worksheet B." The only income/assests I recieved/have is the 'Earned Income' I recieved in that year. Nothing in my tax papers mentions anything about Worksheet A and Worksheet B. What's the deal??? "Earned income is a completely different thing when it comes to federal taxes. "Earned income" is not what you made that year." That helps me out a whole lot....
Do I have to file a federal tax return if I received one payment of miscellaneous income (1099 form)? I'm a university student and my only income for 2007 was volunteering in a medical study. I was paid a few thousand dollars for being in this study, and no taxes were taken out of the payment I received. It will be reported on a 1099 form, for miscellaneous income, by the organization that conducted the study. Since that's my only source of income for the year, I'll be way under the $8,450 minimum federal filing limit. Do I not have to file a federal tax return, since I'm under the minimum limit? Or because it's on a 1099 and not a W-2, do I have to file even though I'm under? Thanks! Yeah, the organization that did the study is going to submit a 1099 form. But since I don't have other income that would make me go over the $8,450 minimum, I'm not sure if I have to even send anything in. I've typed my info into a couple basic tax calculators and they tell me that the tax I owe is $0. But, I don't know if that's true, and if it is, if that means I don't have to file anything at all. Regarding the latest couple answers about the filing limit for this possibly being just a few hundred dollars: are you saying I'm actually going to owe something significant, or just that I have to file because it's a requirement even if nothing is owed? In response to the latest two answers: the total amount I was paid was slightly over the $5,350 figure (I think I was paid $5,500 in total)... but is the $5,350 only applicable if I'm a dependent? I'm not a dependent of anyone else. So if I understand the last couple answers correctly: I'm not a dependent, so therefore I would not owe anything as long as I'm under the $8,750. But, I should file a return regardless. Do I have that right? Thanks!!
Was Mesa Royalty Trust Hillcorp before? We held units of Hillcorp in 2005, but received no information on income tax on the units in 2007 for 2006 taxes. Today we got a packet of Federal Income Tax Information from Mesa Royalty Trust. We are wondering if this is the old Hillcorp.
Do federal or state tax refunds count as income if I file my returns too late? I'm just now filing my tax returns for 2004 and 2005. I waited since I knew I had refunds coming to me. I expect to receive these refunds in 2007. Will I then have to report them as income received in 2007 and pay taxes on those refunds? I didn't think I would but a friend thinks I'll have to treat it as income since I waited too long (over 1 year)
Income tax return (first timer)? I've just had my first job in the summer of 2007 and I was wondering what kind of tax return do I need to file. I know I have to file my federal income tax return. Should I use the form 1040 or 1040 EZ? O_o I'm filing online, so it should be easier, but I've never done this before so I'm pretty much clueless. >_< I'm not sure if I need to file my STATE/LOCAL tax return (in OH). If yes, how do I go about filing it? I called the IRS and asked their operator about a PIN number, but he sounded groggy and not awake. -_- He said I don't need a PIN unless I want to keep track of my past tax returns, but I don't need it to e-file my tax return. Where do I register for a PIN, anyways? I've searched on the IRS site, but no where does it tell me how to register for one. I'm new to this whole thing and I really need help with this. Thanks for your time and help!
Why do we owe so much in taxes? My wife and I made a combined 98K this year. we both have claimed "zero" on the witholding on our W-4s with our employers. When I did the free Turbo-Tax, it said we will have to owe $3200! I was shocked to say the least... At the moment, we don't own a house, we rent, and we don't have any children. the only deductions I used were $200 for charity, and $300 for moving expenses, as well as the state income taxes we have paid for the year, approx. $4500. according to the state taxes, we're going to have to owe an additional $1000 for that too! I just don't believe it, I think we have to be missing something here. As of our last paychecks for the year, we have paid a combined $9500 in federal taxes for the entire year of 2007. Any tax professionals or people with experience who can chime in with advice or help? thanks! I forgot to mention that we currently don't have any IRAs or 401ks. (I know, I know, we're currenty saving cash and paying down debt, next year we will own a house and start retirement savings) If age matters, I'm 27 and my wife is 23. What I don't understand is when I entered 11K for mortgage interest deductions(200K house at 5.75 rate), 5K for state income taxes, it still said we would owe $1700 on our taxes. It just doesn't make any sense to me!
Do I qualify for the tax rebate if I have no payroll income? In 2007, I did not work. I did, however, convert my traditional IRA to a Roth in December of 07, so will have to pay taxes on around $40,000. No taxes were withheld, so I was planning on paying several thousand dollars in federal income tax. Does the $800 rebate mean that my taxes owed will be reduced by $800? Thanks. Since my traditional IRA was funded with payroll wages, it seems to me that I am now claiming those wages as taxable income, and therefore qualify for the $600 tax rebate. Make sense?
How much will I receive on my tax return? I am wondering what to expect back for my Federal Income Tax for 2007. Is there a calculator anywhere out there? Here is my information. Single 26 , do not own any real estate , did not make any taxable stock purchases. W2 53,049 AGI 47,908 Taxable Interest 595$ Any help? Thanks! 7932$ Total Witheld from pay for 2007 for Federal Income Tax
W4 tax questions - what do I put here on this question? Or what does this mean? I claim exemption from withholding for 2007, and I certify that I meet both of the following conditions for exemption: Last year I had a right to a refund of all Federal income tax withheld because I had no tax liability and This year I expect a refund of all Federal income tax witheld because I expect to have no tax liability. If you meet both conditions, write "Exempt" here
How screwed am I when I do my taxes? Any advice? I live in Illinois and work in Missouri, and my employer didn't withhold ANY state taxes throughout 2007 (even though I specifically requested the deduction several times). As of my last check, my gross pay is about $25,000 and my federal withholdings are about $3,000. (I have a much better job starting in January.) Unfortunately, as I am under 25 and don't have any children, I don't qualify for any earned income credits or child tax credits. I have, however, paid well over $2,500 in student loan interest throughout the year and purchased a home in May. What will I owe for state and federal taxes, and are there any tax credits that I could qualify for?
Are these the tax cuts for the rich people keep mentioning? Use the link below as a refernce. Provide your own if you do not like mine. Federal Income Tax Rates from 1992 - 2007 http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.htm
Who pays more income tax....Canadians or Americans? Big G says Canadians 70%. I found this table: Federal tax rates for 2007 Canadians: 15.5% on the first $37,178 of taxable income, + 22% on the next $37,179 of taxable income (on the portion of taxable income between $37,178 and $74,357), + 26% on the next $46,530 of taxable income (on the portion of taxable income between $74,357 and $120,887), + 29% of taxable income over $120,887. 4 minutes ago - 3 days left to answer. - 1 answer - Report Abuse You can't answer your own question.
RON PAUL leads in Polls of people who have heard him ? take a look :? Ron Paul Leads in Polls of People Who Have Heard Him Speak by Jennifer Haman by Jennifer Haman DIGG THIS After the first three debates on National television, three mainstream news channels featured polls asking the American people who won. After the first debate on May 3rd, MSNBC ran a poll obtaining over 72,000 responses showing Ron Paul was the most convincing candidate receiving 45% of the vote. His nearest competitor was Mitt Romney who received 18%. Fox news ran its own poll after the second debates on May 15, and with over 40,000 votes Ron Paul came in second with 25% of the vote. Watching Sean Hannity's face was priceless as while he was saying that Ron Paul's chances were over in this election, Fox's polling numbers flashed across the screen and had Ron Paul in the lead. He immediately did his best spin to claim the polls had been rigged. MSNBC also ran a poll about that debate and discovered Ron Paul was, again, the most convincing candidate with 64% of the over 25,000 responses. After the third debate on June 5, CNN's poll of over 25,000 respondents showed Ron Paul won with 60% of the vote. One would think with such a strong showing on the online polls for a "second tier" candidate that the mainstream media (MSM) would have discussed this phenomenon at length and on the front page. However, no such stories appeared. In fact, MSM pundits did their best to ignore these figures and instead focused mainly on who they deemed to be the top three choices; effectively, taking control of the election and deciding quite undemocratically who was a "real" candidate. Even though the MSM is largely ignoring him, Ron Paul is taking the Internet by storm. His name leads in searched terms ahead of even Paris Hilton, his YouTube videos have been viewed over one million times and he has more Meetup groups than all other GOP candidates combined. Poll after poll conducted on the Internet shows Ron Paul winning or at least in the top three. Yet, these polls are completely discounted and Ron Paul's tremendous Internet support is sloughed off by the MSM. Occasionally, the MSM will grant some notice of the huge grassroots support online but then discount it by saying "he may be doing well online but he is only polling at 1 or 2 percent." Doesn't anyone see a disconnect between those two clauses? Who do they think is on the Internet? Pet mice running around in tubes? The Internet, for those who seem confused, is a link of people who write things and have ideas and OPINIONS. The 300-plus Meetup groups he has across the country are also attended by people. The MSM is trying to get us to believe that Ron Paul is only polling at 1% because that is what was said on a few polls and the fact that he is polling much higher on the Internet does not count. It is as if they believe that the people on the Internet are not real, their opinions do not count, and the Internet polls could not possibly be correct. The argument is absurd, insulting and designed to keep Ron Paul out of the mainstream public's eye. The MSM ignores his success because of the misguided concept that people do not want to "waste" a vote. It is never a waste to vote for what you want: indeed, nothing could be more wasteful than voting for what you do not want because you think it the lesser of two evils. Voting for evil is always a bad idea. Not only is the MSM staying mum to keep you from seeing Ron Paul as a legitimate candidate but there have been active attempts to hide information about his successes. After the third debate CNN not only ran a poll, but also asked viewers to voice their opinions about the debates. Comments started pouring in supporting Ron Paul, along with all the votes. The next day CNN removed the comments from their webpage. Clever supporters found these lost comments through Google's cache (a technology that takes a virtual picture of a webpage on a certain date, so you can see if it has changed). When silence does not work, biased pundits accuse Ron Paul supporters of "spamming" the votes (that is voting over and over for their candidate) and claim that this huge show of support is really being done by a few campaigners. This claim is specious for several reasons. First, if it was so easy to spam the polls, all the candidates would do it and online polling numbers would look more like an American Idol session with tens of millions of votes cast. Second, anyone, who understands that the Internet is not a series of tubes, knows that it is easy for a web designer to develop a poll that prohibits more than one vote per person. In fact, most of the online polls do restrict you to voting only once and if you attempt to vote again, even weeks later, you get a polite message that your vote will not count. Finally, along with the polls themselves, people leave comments, thousands of individual comments. So let's look at these polls and their methodologies. Many online polls have tens of thousands of responses, especially the ones done by the MSM immediately after the debates, while old-fashioned telephone pollsters only get responses from hundreds. Yet, only the old telephone polls are reported on by the MSM. We are asked to accept that a poll with 600 persons responding is more accurate than a poll with 70,000 respondents. For example, a much-cited Zogby poll admits that they only targeted 500 interviews and drew their samples randomly from telephone CD's of a national listed sample. (In that poll Ron Paul has a 3% lead). A recent Washington Post article cited its own telephone poll that only reached 1205 adults, and that was used to say Ron Paul is only receiving 1% support. Instead of citing polls that have 70 to 100 times more respondents, the MSM still sticks to old-fashioned telephone-polling methods. The world has changed. We no longer need to depend on poor polls that only call a few hundred people, nor should we be relying on them to tell the whole story. Some say random telephone sampling is more effective just because of its randomness and therefore there is no self-selection bias as in the online polls in which one chooses to partake. However, elections are also based on self-selection and are only won and lost by those who choose to go to the polls: so shouldn't the self-selected polling methods be more accurate? The good news is that of those who have heard Ron Paul speak (if only for the 5 minutes or so he gets in the debates) he is leading by a landslide; unfortunately, not enough people are getting to hear about him. This race would look much different if the leading headlines the days following the GOP debates were (in order of the debates): 1. Ron Paul takes GOP by surprise and WINS the debate. 2. Ron Paul once again a leading contender in second debate, comes in second. 3. Ron Paul wins third debate hands down: other candidates struggling to keep up. If the people were told Ron Paul won the debates, more would learn about him and his support would grow exponentially. In all fairness, the polls that show that Ron Paul is ahead with 98% of the vote are just as inaccurate as the polls that show he is only polling at 1% and the truth lies somewhere in the middle. But the largest online polls, the ones taken after the debates, have him receiving somewhere between 45% and 60% of the votes. So, why the big disparity in polling numbers? Some have suggested that Ron Paul has a lot of young supporters who do not own landlines and thus are not being polled. Other explanations come to mind as well: 1. Typical polls will only call a certain type of voter e.g. people who voted Republican in the last election and this will leave out a lot of Ron Paul supporters. Ron Paul's message of liberty and freedom reaches across the aisle and a lot of previously registered Democrats are switching parties to vote for him in this election. For the same reason, many Libertarians and Independents are also going to be voting as Republicans this election. Much of his support also comes from young people who are voting in their first Presidential election and thus would have no previous voting record. 2. Ron Paul's message of freedom and liberty is so exciting that people who have decided not to vote in past elections have decided that finally they have someone for whom to vote. 3. Some polls are so biased they do not even list Ron Paul as a choice (coincidentally, in a few of those "other" is leading the pack): Hard to win a poll when your name is not on the list. 4. Ron Paul fights for the individual, not the government, and his message appeals to those who like to be left alone. During this election many individuals have caller ID and often choose to avoid telemarketers and callers they do not know. 5. Some of these polls begin with intrusive questions about a person's gender, religious affiliation, annual income, and other information some see as none of anyone's business. If you refuse to answer the initial questions they will not continue with the questions. The type of person that likes Ron Paul, also tends to like privacy. 6. Sadly, not enough people are getting to hear about his policies. Once they hear him, Ron Paul's supporters are very passionate about his message. A search of Internet "blogs" shows people writing zealously about him. Nothing could be more thrilling than to see an 18-year-old excited about the election process, shouting out support for Ron Paul, begging to hear more information about the Federal Reserve and its implications for the country. Through his campaign, Ron Paul is teaching many the benefits of limited government. There should be no surprise that his message is so well received; it is the one taught to us by Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and other founding fathers. It is the message of liberty, freedom, with the basis of a republic, not a democracy. We have been lied to so often, and our Constitution ripped apart at the seams, that when a person comes along speaking basic truths and principles, it awakens a part of us buried for so long. When ignoring Ron Paul does not work, and removing messages about him receives backlash, the next stage is to call his supporters rabid, nuts, crazy, unstable. If you cannot attack the man, attack his supporters. Yet who can blame people who get upset when a life-saving message comes along and the MSM tries to keep it from the public. Ron Paul's message is life-saving. He wants to end the war, he wants to help ease poverty by eliminating the Federal Reserve and its ability to steal through monetary inflation. He wants to end the Income Tax and give those who need it most their entire salaries. The anger you hear is frustration by his supporters at being marginalized, just as they are by so many government actions these days, and fury when all this support is discounted. Of course people are getting upset. They do not like being manipulated and they especially do not like it when a Presidential campaign is being hijacked. The worst part about the MSM treatment of Ron Paul, is that finally the people have a candidate they really love, and a man who would get this country back on the proper course. They have a man who will follow the Constitutional course that served this country so well for so long. Instead of rejoicing and helping the country and the people find their way, corporate media giants are trying to silence his message by ignoring him completely or reporting on only the most obscure, misleading and slanderous articles (could this be because Ron Paul is also against corporate welfare?). Most recently, even the Associated Press got into the "let's lead with misleading statements" game. In reporting on how Dr. Paul decided to hold his own rally after being the only candidate in the debates to not be invited to a Presidential Forum in Iowa, the AP's first line in the article was that Ron Paul has added "party crashing" to his debate tactics. As any ten-year-old knows, to crash a party you have to attend the party. Ron Paul had not announced he would attend the Presidential forum. Instead, he decided to hold a completely separate event immediately following the forum in the same venue. That is not party crashing, that is called campaigning. The article went on to tell the truth about the situation, but that catch phrase was repeated as a headline across the country impugning Dr. Paul's character. See for example this ABC News headline: Republican Ron Paul to Crash Iowa Forum. Just as Ron Paul spoke of blowback in the context of military interference in foreign affairs, unless the mainstream media ends the Ron Paul blackout and misinformation drive, they will lose the next generation who is seeing it as a biased, manipulating, election-fixing force not to be trusted. When Ron Paul gets heard or seen, he is liked. As soon as people who do not own computers are able to see him or read his message his numbers in the national polls will rise just as they have done on the Internet. In general, the American people are saying they want liberty and freedom: Now, if only the MSM would listen. "Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." ~ John Quincy Adams July 16, 2007 Jennifer Haman
How do I have to report sweepstakes income if I sell the prize? I won a prize back in August 2006 worth almost as much as a car (about $9000). I still have it, but have never used it, and was just waiting for winter to end so I could decide if I want to keep it or sell it. I already paid sales tax on it. But, for income tax purposes, I am assuming I have to report the entire value as 2006 income. That's fine, but what if I sell the item in 2007 for less than it's worth (say $7500)??? Can I then declare my sweepstakes income for 2006 as $7500, or do I have to report the whole thing? it's going to be hard enough to pay federal + state income tax on an extra $7500 let alone the full $9000. Thanks I finally received the prize in December, when I couldn't use it or sell it. I'm still waiting for a 1099, but since I know the exact value that's what I was expecting to have to claim on my taxes.
Bankruptcy, Multiple Addresses, and Filing Federal And State Taxes? I need help, Please. I lived in PA my whole life, own a home there. I lost my job 1.5 years ago, and I had to file bankruptcy in april of 2007. For the past 8 months I have been staying with a friend and working in Missouri. But my home is in PA, but been using my friends address for local employment. My question is: Do I file my federal and state taxes for Pennsylvania like I always have? If I do that, and on my PA forms, put down taxes that were paid to MO, or do I have to file MO only, and if I do that, PA will be looking for me for taxes? Or if I do the PA income tax, will MO be after me for a tax return? Also, does my bankruptcy and chapter 13 payment plan affect my tax return at all? I am in need of help. I always do my taxes myself cause I cannot afford to pay an accountant right now. Please help.
how much will i owe in taxes this year???? I live in oregon, income from my job 20,376 interest income 5,566 contribution to 401k $202 28 years old. how much will i owe in state and federal taxes for 2007?? thanx
Tax-free funding of IRA with non-retirement-plan funds? Any retroactive nontaxation of earnings? I have a couple of non-retirement-plan Vanguard funds that I bought several years ago when I was 20 and knew very little about federal income tax law. I'd now like to use these non-retirement-plan funds to fund a new Vanguard IRA account with the same funds for tax years 2006 and 2007. Here are my questions: 1. I've received mixed signals from Vanguard about whether doing this would be considered a taxable event in the form of a "sale" that would incur capital gains taxes on any appreciation of the "sold" funds since purchasing them. I can't find anything specifically addressing this issue in the IRS's publications. It seem reasonable to me to view this transaction as basically the equivalent of a rollover, which I know is not taxed, and not a taxable event. 2. If I put one or both of my funds into an IRA for tax year 2006 now, can I defer tax on the portion of the earnings on the contributed fund(s) that would have been deferred had I made the contribution at the start of 2006?
Who do I pay state tax to if I have moved and received a pension refund check? I used to work for the State of Maryland. I had mandatory contributions to a state pension fund, but I left in 2006 before I was vested. I found out later (a nice surprise) that I was entitled to get the money I put in back, and I recently got my refund. I have lived in New Jersey for the entirety of 2007. Federal tax was withheld from the check, but not state tax. I presume that I owe state income tax to New Jersey. What confuses me is that on the stub, an estimated MD State taxable amount was listed, about 7% of the total - with the comment "excludes IRC414(h)(2)MD pick-up contributions." I worry that because I earned the money while I lived in Maryland, that I would owe the state tax to them, and have to file an extra state return (which would make things exceedingly complicated). I am probably overthinking this. Anyone out there who can straighten me out? I would feel comfortable categorizing this as a "refund of contributions." The check stub clearly identifies this as a "REFUND".
ATT.com Federal Excise Tax where do I find it? I was told by one of your Customer Service representatives on Friday, 01-05-2007, that I could find the information that I needed on the Federal Excise Tax Paid on ATT.com today, Monday, 01-08-2007. When I put in ATT.com, nothing comes up. What am I doing wrong? I would like to get ready to file my income taxes, but I keep coming up empty handed on the Federal Excise part. Will you tell me what I am doing wrong?
Do I need to file income tax? I am a 19 year old college student and a California resident. I work two jobs, but the expected income for the jobs is $250 and $2000, making a total of $2250. What is the maximum amount I can earn without filing taxes this for 2007? (both federal and state)
And you wonder why undocumented immigrants dont pay taxes? Posted: July 26, 2007 1:00 a.m. Eastern By Bob Unruh © 2007 WorldNetDaily.com The Internal Revenue Service has lost a lawyer's challenge in front of a jury to prove a constitutional foundation for the nation's income tax, and the victorious attorney now is setting his sights higher. "I think now people are beginning to realize that this has got to be the largest fraud, backed up by intimidation and extortion and by the sheer force of taking peoples property and hard-earned money without any lawful authorization whatsoever," lawyer Tom Cryer told WND just days after a jury in Louisiana acquitted him of two criminal tax counts. And before you consign him to the legions of "tin foil hat brigades" who argue against paying taxes, and then want payment to explain how to do that, he addresses the issue up front. "These snake oil peddlers have conned millions of dollars out of many well-intended patriots and left a trail of broken lives in their wake. … These charlatans should be avoided, not only because they will lead you to bankruptcy and prison, but because by association they discredit those who are telling the truth," he said. The truth, he said, is where he comes in, with the launch of a new Truth Attack website that is intended to build on his victory, and create a coalition of resources to defeat – ultimately – the income tax in the United States. Although the legal citations in the case tend to run the length of paragraphs, Cryer told WND the underlying issue is not that complicated. Essentially, he argued that income is not necessarily any money that comes to a person, but rather categories such as profit and interest. He said the free exchange of labor for compensation has been upheld as a right by the Supreme Court, but that doesn't necessarily make the compensation income. If ever such an argument were to be presented widely, Cryer said, the income to the federal government would plummet. But not to worry, he said, the expenses could be reduced equally by eliminating programs, departments and agencies that also have no foundation in the Constitution. "The Founding Fathers intentionally restricted the taxing powers of the new federal government as a measure of restraint on its size. By exceeding that limited taxing authority the federal government has been able to obtain resources beyond its intended reach, and that money has enabled the federal government to exceed its authority," he said. For example, he said, the Constitution does not empower the federal government to regulate education, or employment, and agriculture, yet it does so. The jury in U.S. District Court in Louisiana voted 12-0 to find Cryer, of Shreveport, not guilty of failure to file income taxes for two years. He had been indicted in 2006 on charges of failing to pay $73,000 to the IRS in 2000 and 2001. The next step in his personal case will be up to the IRS and prosecutors, if they choose to continue the issue, he said. But for the rest of the nation, he's working with Save-a-Patriot, the Free Enterprise Society, Live Free Now and his own Lie Free Zone to spread the message of the truth. "There are three points that are important," he told WND. "There's no law making the average working man liable [for income taxes], there's no law or regulation that allows the IRS to contend that earnings are 100 percent profit received in exchange for nothing, and the right to earn a living through any lawful occupation is a constitutionally protected fundamental right, and it is exempt from taxation." Spokesman Robert Marvin in Washington's IRS office told WND the Internal Revenue Code provides for taxation on salaries or wages, but when pressed for a specific citation, or constitutional provision, he said, "I can't comment." Cryer's encounter with tax law began more than a decade ago when a friend told him the income tax was sham. Cryer started researching, hoping to keep his friend out of trouble. But his conclusions, after years of research, were exactly what his friend told him. He researched not only tax laws, but also the documents pertaining to the drafting of the U.S. Constitution as well as the first income tax. He said throughout his battle, he's offered at every turn to pay taxes if the IRS could show him the authorization, and that never has happened. "The Criminal Investigation Division and Department of Justice both responded only with 'your position is frivolous.' I had never stated a position, so how could they know whether it was frivolous?" he said. "Imagine my sending you a bill for $1,000 and when you call me and ask what the bill was for I simply said, 'that position is frivolous, just write the check and send it in.'" His acquittal, he said, was a precedent because it means "people can see and recognize the truth." He said multiple Supreme Court opinions have affirmed an individual's ownership of his or her own labor, and "exercising your fundamental rights" is not taxable. "It is definitely a trade. What most people receive in the form of wages, salaries or in my case fees that they personally earned for their labor is not received in exchange for nothing." He said there might be a profit that should be taxable, but there might not. "The IRS lets Wal-Mart sell a trillion dollars worth of goods, but they can back out their cost of goods [before being taxed,]" he said. "The IRS considers, in the case of a Wal-Mart wage earner, 100 percent of what he takes in is profit." "But he's using his life, energy and work lifespan, and depleting it as he goes," Cryer told WND. "[Working] is a God-given fundamental right that is protected under the Constitution and can't be taxed any more than exercising freedom of speech." While he waits to see what, if anything, the IRS and Justice Department will do next in his case, he's working to coordinate the groups that are battling taxation as unconstitutional. "I have started a campaign to unify [the work] and we've got a number of organizations that are sponsoring and supporting this campaign," he said. The goal is to get everyone "who is aware of the truth" organized so they can spread the word. He warned without a restoration of constitutional basics, the nation is lost. "Read your Constitution and you will see that the federal role does not include ANY authority to regulate or tax any citizen directly and that WE expressly reserved the right to rule and govern ourselves as States, not as mere political subdivisions," his website says. "The Constitution does not allow the government to run your lives, but the money it is stealing from millions of Americans is the fuel for its over-reaching and kibitzing. Take the money back and we and our states and communities can again be free," he said. Long Story short, income tax is unconstitutional, and yet most undocumented immigrants pay taxes
When should I pay capital gains tax from selling stocks? Let's say I have short term capital gains of $5,000 from selling stock A and long term capital gains of $10,000 from selling stock B. Both stocks were sold on 06/10/2006. To avoid any penalty should I pay federal income tax for those gains right away? Or I can wait until April 15, 2007?
Net income from my ex. All or partial? I divorced in 2007. In the section of changes in marital status. This question about my ex: "His or her net income for 2006 to claim certain credits (line 236 of his /her 2006 Federal tax return) " refers to my Ex's total 2007 net income or just her income for the time we were still married? My appologies. I made a BIG mistake. Replace in my question all "2007" by "2006". I got my divorce in 2006. Legally completed divorce. We were not legally separated before the divorce. We were living together until the divorce became completed. Thanks Ontario CGA. But, she did have an small income before our legal divorce. If I don't enter it, wouldn't it be dangerous for any of us?
Math question? If I made $58,000 in 2007 and paid $10,000 in federal income tax, what percentage did I pay in tax? how do you calculate this? glad i dont have to use math in my job! Thanks very much for your help!
could you help to calculate my refund with this details from 3 different employers? (Married filling jointly , Husband working, wife not working) the information W2 from the 1st employer,2nd employer,3rd employer 1:Wages,tips,other compensations :$9311.33,$220.88,$4199.05 2:Federal income Tax withheld:$94.63,$1.65,BLANK 3:Social Security Wages:$9311.33,$220.88,$4199.05 4:Social Security Tax withheld:$557.30,$13.69,$260.34 5:Medical wages and Tips:$9311.33,$220.88,$4199.05 6:Medical tax withheld:$135.02,$3.20,$60.89 no:7:----to------14:BLANK 15:State:GA 16:state wages ,tips etc:$9311.33,$220.88,$4199.05 17:State Income tax:$465.62,$8.01,$92.77 NOTE:my payslip (applicable only to 3rd emp) shows marital status under Federal Single and under State shows married filling jointly.i didnt take note until when i want to do my filling.I went to personnel.They said the correction from single to married filing jointly will only reflect 2007 and not 2006. It was due to error when i was filling my data when i got employed.is it not going to affect my tax retur
Help on income taxes!!? Long story short...husband and I made approximately $60,000 in 2007. An error was made and he's been claiming 4 people for 6 months on his paycheck, (I claimed no one through the year). We only have a family of 3 so how 4 people were made exempt is beyond me. We've paid approximately $6540 in federal and $2720 in state. How much are we going to have to pay in? And what will happen if we can only do a payment plan? Do we have to get a lawyer to setup a payment plan? Any info would be appreciated. Also, we don't have any interest on a house we can deduct or anything like that. We file short form as we don't own anything.
Which Presidential Canditate is more concerned with this? My head is a spinning. This is too true to be very funny The next time you hear a politician use the word 'billion' in a casual manner, think about whether you want the 'politicians' spending YOUR tax money. A billion is a difficult number to comprehend, but one advertising agency did a good job of putting that figure into some perspective in one of its releases. A. A billion seconds ago it was 1959. B. A billion minutes ago Jesus was alive. C. A billion hours ago our ancestors were living in the Stone Age. D. A billion days ago no-one walked on the earth on two feet. E. A billion dollars ago was only 8 hours and 20 minutes, at the rate our government is spending it. While this thought is still fresh in our brain, let's take a look at New Orleans It's amazing what you can learn with some simple division Louisiana Senator, Mary Landrieu (D), is presently asking the Congress for $250 BILLION to rebuild New Orleans . Interesting number, what does it mean? A. Well, if you are one of 484,674 residents of New Orleans (every man, woman, child), you each get $516,528. B. Or, if you have one of the 188,251 homes in New Orleans , your home gets $1,329,787. C. Or, if you are a family of four, your family gets $2,066,012. Washington, D.C . HELLO!!! ... Are all your calculators broken?? Tax his land, Tax his wage, Tax his bed in which he lays. Tax his tractor, Tax his mule, Teach him taxes is the rule. Tax his cow, Tax his goat, Tax his pants, Tax his coat. Tax his ties, Tax his shirts, Tax his work, Tax his dirt. Tax his tobacco, Tax his drink, Tax him if he tries to think. Tax his booze, Tax his beers, If he cries, Tax his tears. Tax his bills, Tax his gas, Tax his notes, Tax his cash. Tax him good and let him know That after taxes, he has no dough. If he hollers, Tax him more, Tax hi m until he's good and sore. Tax his coffin, Tax his grave, Tax the sod in which he lays. Put these words upon his tomb, 'Taxes drove me to my doom!' And when he's gone, We won't relax, We'll still be after the inheritance TAX!! Accounts Receivable Tax Building Permit Tax CDL License Tax Cigarette Tax Corporate Income Tax Dog License Tax Federal Income Tax Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA) Fishing License Tax Food License Tax Fuel Perm it Tax Gasoline Tax Hunting License Tax Inheritance Tax Inventory Tax IRS Interest Charges (tax on top of tax), IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax), Liquor Tax, Luxury Tax, Marriage License Tax, Medicare Tax, Property Tax, Real Estate Tax, Service charge taxes, Social Security Tax, Road Usage Tax (Truckers), Sales Taxes, Recreational Vehicle Tax, School Tax, State Income Tax, State Unemployment Tax (SUTA), Telephone Federal Excise Tax, Telephone Federal Universal Service Fe e Tax, Telephone Federal, State and Local Su rcharge Tax, Telephone Minimum Usage Su rcharge Tax, Telephone Recurring and Non-recurring Charges Tax, Telephone State and Local Tax, Telephone Usage Charge Tax, Utility Tax, Vehicle License Registration Tax, Vehicle Sales Tax, Watercraft Registration Tax, Well Permit Tax, Workers Compensation Tax. STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY? Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, and our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids. What happened? Can you spell 'politicians!' And I still have to 'press 1' for English. I hope this goes around THE USA at least 100 times What the heck happened????? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.17/1176 - Release Date: 12/6/2007
Inherited or gifted house-what tax issues exist, USA? Approximately 1980, my parents deeded our home to me with a life estate for themselves. Upon father's death, 2001 the house was mine. Valued at about 90k then, I sold it at 63k early this year/2007. The estate was not large enough to pay any taxes and I am a direct heir if that is relevant. Where does this fit in federal income taxes? A quick websearch was not assuring and I have never received IRS answers that matched. Thanks for any self-help direction you can provide. I do my own taxes. Parents built house for 9k in 1957, added 9k addition 1978. Built detached garage in 1963 for about $4k and I added a 8k kennel and fence. Sat on about 7 acres father bought from grandparents for $1 and affection as that was the way things were done. My position is house/land was worth 90k and I lost money on its sale. Still do I file a capital gains(loss) or sale of home (bought home in new state)? Will Turbo tax be able to clarify? Spicertax-I lived in house from 2001-2005 when I married and moved out of state. As I read I qualify for the situation that this was my residence. Actually, this was my permanent residence since birth! I also had a temporary apartment when I went to grad school but maintained the residence until marriage. I bought a new (ha-100 years old) house. I think this situation was sale of home with loss. I will call IRS but already know they often give noncommittal answer.
What exactly does income tax refer to? I am trying to calculate how much tax I need to be paying each year. I was looking at the IRS website at the income tax rates. It says filing as married, jointly for 2007 is $1,565.00 plus 15% of the amount over 15,650 for incomes between $15,650 and $63,700. Does income tax refer to only the federal withholding or everything combined (federal + state + medicare + oasdi + etc..)? If I anticipate making $63000 for 2007 in the state of Texas, how much total taxes should I expect to pay (this includes federal withholding, oasdi, medicare, and any other applicable taxes)? I want to know exactly how much I should expect per pay check (bi-weekly) if I have the exact amount of taxes withheld per paycheck so that at the end of the year I neither owe the IRS or have a refund.
So, now that a respected conservative, Alan Keyes has formally announced his candidacy? Alan Keyes announces for President! Will appear in Values Voter Debate Sept. 17 September 14, 2007 RenewAmerica staff On Friday, Sept. 14, Alan Keyes filed a Statement of Candidacy (Form 2) with the Federal Election Commission--thus officially announcing as a Republican candidate for President of the United States. Keyes told Janet Parshall, host of a nationally syndicated radio show, that he's "unmoved" by the lack of moral courage shown by the other candidates, among whom he sees no standout who articulates the "key kernel of truth that must, with courage, be presented to our people." He added, "The one thing I've always been called to do is to raise the standard . . . of our allegiance to God and His authority that has been the foundation stone of our nation's life"--and he decried the lack of "forthright, clear, and clarion declaration" from the other candidates concerning this issue. As a result, Keyes said, "We're putting together an effort that's not going to be like anything before, because it's going to be entirely based on citizen action. We're going to be challenging people to take a pledge for America's revival," and elevate them from spectators in the political arena to participants. The former Reagan diplomat ran previously for president in 1996 and 2000. During the 1996 race, he was widely credited with forcing abortion to the center of public policy debate. In 2000, he was acknowledged by commentators at Fox News, MSNBC, and CNN as the winner of the Republican presidential primary debates. In that election, he continued his prior focus on America's moral crisis, and also made abolishing the income tax a serious question for policy-makers. This election cycle, Keyes has already significantly influenced the debate, according to some observers, who note that at least a few of the GOP candidates appear intent on imitating some of Keyes' well-known positions, in an effort to woo moral conservatives--without which no Republican is likely to win in the general election. As a prelude to running, prior to making up his mind to announce, Keyes has been writing a series of essays on the 2008 election titled "The Crisis of the Republic"--published at RenewAmerica and disseminated by several other outlets. A common theme of the articles is the need to restore personal sovereignty that is based in religious premises and self-discipline, if American society is to survive in liberty. Keyes said he plans to join the Values Voter Presidential Debate Sept. 17 in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. To hear the entire Keyes announcement, click here: http://www.renewamerica.us/archives/play.php?mp3=115 To read a transcript, click here: http://www.renewamerica.us/archives/transcript.php?id=426 To visit Keyes' campaign website, AlanKeyes.com, click here: http://www.alankeyes.com http://www.renewamerica.us/news/070914keyes.htm How many plan on catching the debate that he plans on being a part of tomorrow? Also, will this place an end to the endless liberal rant that’s been on this forum with regards to the Republicans not having a person of color in the race for the Presidency? I’m excited that he’s become a candidate and am looking forward hearing to what he has to say. Are you?
How are college students earnings used to calculate expected student contribution? I have a college junior and freshman. Our (wife and me) earnings for 2006 were < $16000, so we didn't file federal income taxes. Our expected family contribution to expenses of both was 0 and 2007 looks the same. Between scholarships and financial aid, 100% of college expenses were met. My junior earned ~$9000 in a 2006 summer job and filed 2006 fed income taxes. However the university calculated his expected contribution for 2007 term at 0. My question is why did the university not expect my junior to use some fraction of his 06 wages for his college expenses?
Can anyone tell me how much I should expect on my federal tax return?? I worked through the end of August. I am single with zero dependents. I own my own home and have paid over $13,000 in interest on my home. My gross income was $70,000 at the end of August. My net income was $47,000. My federal withholding was $13,500 and federal OASDI withholding was $4200. My state withholding is $2700. I did not have any other means of income in 2007. I have spent over $14,000 in medical expenses and have various "mileage" deductions. I have been told that I should expect at least $13,000 this year based on what I received in 2006 (see below). Anyway, if anyone could give me a ballpark estimate, that would be great! Thanks! P.S. I worked all year in 2006, grossed $102,000 with only about $5000 in medical. I did have several deductions (probably the same or less than I will have for 2007...). My refund was over $8000 for 2007.
Accounting Question? On Jan.21.2007 these Liability accounts are presented in the ledger: Accounts payable 42500 Sales Tax payable 6600 Unearned service revenue 19000 During January the following occured: Jan1. Borrowed 12k in cash from Midland bank on 4 month, 8%, 12000 note jan5. Sold merchandise for cash totalin 6,510, which inculdes 5 % sales taxes. Jan12. provided services for customers who had made advance payments of 10,000 (credit service revenue) jan14. paid state treasurers department for sales tax collected december of 2006, 6600 jan.20 sold 500 units of new product on credit at 48 per unit, plus 5% sales tax. Note* during jan, company employees earned wages of 60000. withholdings inculded were 4590 for Social Sec., 5000 for federal income tax and 1500 for state income tax. 1. journalize january entries 2. " " adjusting entries at jan.31 for outstanding note payable and for wage expense and payroll tax expense 3. prepare current liablilites section of balance sheet.
how do i fill out this line w4? 7 I claim exemption from withholding for 2007, and I certify that I meet both of the following conditions for exemption. c Last year I had a right to a refund of all federal income tax withheld bec ause I had no tax liability and c This year I expect a refund of all federal income tax withheld because I expect to have no tax liab ility. 7 If you meet both conditions, write “Exempt” here i am lost i am a married man with a newborn and my wife doesn't work.
how do i fill out this line w4? 7 I claim exemption from withholding for 2007, and I certify that I meet both of the following conditions for exemption. c Last year I had a right to a refund of all federal income tax withheld bec ause I had no tax liability and c This year I expect a refund of all federal income tax withheld because I expect to have no tax liab ility. 7 If you meet both conditions, write “Exempt” here
Socialists and Neocons versus Ron Paul? Socialists and Neocons versus Ron Paul Bryan Edds Lew Rockwell.com Wednesday Aug 22, 2007 From my experience, people who attack libertarians such as Ron Paul are often not serious about ideas. I have noticed the individuals who deride Dr. Paul do so mostly with shallow and dishonest attacks. Take the various socialists and welfare-statists who attack Ron Paul. I understand they support nationalizing healthcare while generally being against the occupation of Iraq. Because they oppose the occupation, they should find a powerful ally in someone as principally opposed to it as Ron Paul. Take also the neoconservatives in the mass (minded) media such as Faux News who attack and omit Dr. Paul. I understand they support the occupation of the Middle East but also believe government should be strictly limited in accordance with traditional conservative ideas (right? right???). In Ron Paul, they have a great opportunity to highlight these at least rhetorical parallels while simultaneously expressing reasonable disagreements. Because of these considerations, I believe it reasonable to expect a certain amount of give and take among the three camps, if only for practical reasons. What I have experienced instead has been a surreal and dishonest two-front attack against Ron Paul. No argument seems to be too trivial or irrelevant for the anti-Paulians to make. They seem to be bringing up every possible issue (real or imagined) against Ron Paul in the hopes something – anything – will stick. Consider: While the President gets dictatorial power to spy on and indefinitely kidnap innocent Americans, socialists and neocons speculate wildly about Ron Paul supporters "spamming" internet polls. While thousands of men, women, and children violently die in Iraq and Afghanistan, socialists and neocons misrepresent Ron Paul's refusal to fund stem cell research. While the Bush administration plots to drop nuclear weapons on Iran, socialists and neocons spin every single Ron Paul victory to be meaningless or nonexistent. While people suffer without healthcare because government intervention makes it unaffordable to the poor, socialists and neocons distort a decade-old mishap Ron Paul had with one of his previous ghostwriters. Where they manage to attack Dr. Paul’s ideas directly, they do so with increasingly ineffective arguments. Consider further: While the Constitution is trashed and mocked by all three branches, socialists and neocons talk about how Ron Paul's message of rule of law is anachronistic. While government at all levels rob the people blind, socialists and neocons sneer at Ron Paul’s suggestion to get rid of the Federal income tax. While the American economy further implodes due to the boom and bust cycle created by the Federal Reserve, socialists and neocons talk about how Ron Paul's anti-Fed proposals are "irrelevant." While the prices of essential goods dramatically increase via inflation, socialists and neocons talk about how Ron Paul's hard-money ideas are unrealistic. While Ron Paul educates Americans on economics, socialists and neocons spread discredited Keynesian and Marxist myths which undermine liberty and prosperity. While Ron Paul plans to help reintegrate America with the world through peaceful trade and foreign policy, socialists and neocons smear him as "isolationist." While Ron Paul gains more supporters every day, socialists and neocons criticize his lack of name recognition in land-line phone polling – yet at the same time groan about how fanatical and pervasive his supporters are... Something isn't right. There is honest disagreement, and then there is demagoguery. There is mutual respect, and then there is mud-slinging. I cannot name one person who Dr. Paul has disparaged as badly as most of his critics see fit to disparage him. This says a lot about all said parties involved. What is it then about Ron Paul that inspires such fevered attacks? I will say what I believe. I believe the battle for freedom takes place not only in the upcoming election, but also in the arena of ideas. In this arena, I believe Ron Paul’s message is more powerful than any political shenanigans that can be put against him. I believe also the embittered detractors have good reason to be up in arms. With every Ron Paul victory, they have found their intellectual weaponry to be unexpectedly brittle and ineffective against the message of freedom.
Tax Refund-Any1 get theirs offset/garnished? Hey All, Good to see the board is still doing well! I have a question for you all, please. I got this msg on 'Where's my refund' site; Refund Status Results Please select this button to print your Refund Results for your records. Your tax refund is scheduled to be direct deposited on March 16, 2007. If your refund is not credited to your account by March 21, 2007, check with your bank to find out if it has been received. Please wait until March 21, 2007 before you contact us again because we are unable to take any action until then. HERE-> Please read the following information related to your tax situation: * Tax Topic 203 - Failure to Pay Child Support, Federal Non-Tax and State Income Tax Obligations Please Note: Your refund may be reduced to pay a past due obligation such as child support, another federal agency debt, or state income tax. If this applies to you, the Financial Management Service, who issues IRS refunds, will send you a notice informing you of any offset they have made. The details of the debt are not provided to the IRS. Please do not call us to inquire about the details because we will not be able to answer your questions. Instead, direct any questions you have about the offset or debt to the agency identified on the notice. I am wondering did any of you get your refund and have the part where I put 'HERE->' and still got your refund anyway? I am trying to figure out if they put that there because they know I am being offset/garnished or if they put that at the bottom of your refund deposit notice as a disclaimer for everyone. I don't recall it being there last year, but maybe I just don't recall, damn tree's making me forget stuff lol. I called the FMS (financial management services) about the defaulted student loans but they say it 'may' be garnished. Whatever nonsense that is, like uh tell me yes or no dammit lol. Anyway, thanks for any reply's!! Sean
Why do liberals want to steal more money from the rich which they owned by themselves? http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/07/16/business/tax.php This is just another example of how the liberals are trying to shove a failed socialist agenda down the throats of the American people. Recent calculations by the Congressional Budget Office of U.S. tax rates show a highly progressive system. (The numbers are based on 2004 data, but the tax code has not changed much since then.) The poorest fifth of the population, with average annual income of $15,400, pays only 4.5 percent of its income in federal taxes. The middle fifth, with income of $56,200, pays 13.9 percent. And the top fifth, with income of $207,200, pays 25.1 percent. I'm sick of hearing the stupid arguments that the rich don't pay taxes. The rich very well do pay taxes as shown in the source above. In fact, more taxes than the average American. In conclusion, don't fall for the lies of the la- la land liberals. They'are just trying to suppress success in this great nation. And they're trying to suppress success so America become an averge or mediocre nation. I won't let that happen too America. GOD BLESS AMERICA! Lordy! One might wonder how Buffett gets away with a tax rate of only 17.7 percent, while a typical millionaire is paying so much more. Most likely, part of the answer is that Buffett's income is made up largely of dividends and capital gains, which are taxed at only 15 percent. By contrast, many other top earners pay the maximum ordinary income tax rate of 35 percent on their salaries, bonuses and business income.
What are the current 2007 tax rates on someone in the "highest bracket"? I'm doing some investment forecasting and I'd like to know what rates I should use for someone in what is described as the "highest tax bracket"? I need the 3 USA federal rates for ordinary income, capital gains, and cost recovery.
Are you ready for the Democratic tax hikes? Are you ready for the Democratic tax hikes? When Republicans passed major tax relief packages in 2001 and 2003, we predicted that a booming economy, new jobs for millions of Americans, and an increase in investment and innovation would result. The past several years have proved our theory correct: When government gets out of the way, the American people will get to work. The 2001 and 2003 tax reductions have spurred more than five years of uninterrupted growth. The economy grew at a robust 3.4 percent in the second quarter of 2007. Productivity growth has averaged 2.8 percent since 2001, considerably above the average of each of the past three decades. Since August 2003, our economy has created more than 8.2 million jobs, and the current unemployment rate is just 4.5 percent, lower than the averages of the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s. Wages have been on the rise, and real after-tax income is up 9.9 percent since President Bush took office, an average of nearly $3,000 per person. The tax relief has helped produce an economy that has generated higher than expected tax revenues for the federal government. Tax receipts have risen 37 percent over the last three years and are projected to increase another 7 percent this year. These rising tax receipts have, in turn, helped drive down the deficit, which is projected to drop significantly in 2007 for the third year in a row. The deficit this year is expected to measure just 1.5 percent of GDP, considerably below the average of the last 40 years. The tax relief we passed has had exactly the effect we intended — it has spurred growth and innovation and created jobs and opportunities for millions of Americans. But continuing this growth requires continuing the policies that have produced this growth in the first place. Failing to extend the tax relief we have passed would result in a de facto tax hike that could cripple our economy and undo much of the progress we have made over the last few years. Lowering taxes on income and investment encourages people to work more and invest more, because they get a greater return on their work and investments. This extra work and investment creates new jobs, increases productivity, and encourages innovation and development — in other words, produces economic growth, as we saw with the 2001 and 2003 tax relief. Raising taxes, on the other hand, has the opposite effect. As rates increase, the rewards of labor and investment decrease. People see more of their income and the returns on their investments eaten up by taxes, and this gives them little incentive to work more or invest more. Without new labor and investment, economic growth grinds to a halt, and the economy stagnates. Unfortunately, Democrats have approved a budget that fails to extend the bulk of the 2001 and 2003 tax relief — most of which is set to expire in the next few years — resulting in a staggering tax hike of at least $736 billion. Most notably, the Democrats’ budget fails to extend the lower tax rate on capital gains and dividends and most of the income tax relief we’ve passed, the two provisions that have done the most to spur the strong economic growth of the past several years. In addition to this massive tax hike, Democrats on the House Ways and Means Committee are also proposing another growth-stifling tax hike to pay for alternative minimum tax relief, this one a 4 percent tax hike on higher income Americans and small business owners. Almost 20 million Americans will be liable for the AMT this year if Congress doesn’t act. While Republicans strongly agree that the AMT must be fixed once and for all so that it doesn’t target millions of middle-class families, paying for an AMT fix with a tax hike is not the answer. Raising taxes on these Americans would place a particularly heavy burden on small businesses, most of which are taxed at the individual level. Small businesses employ half of all private sector employees and have been responsible for 60 to 80 percent of the net new jobs created annually over the last ten years. Burdening successful small businesses with significant tax hikes, as the Democrats’ plan would do, would jeopardize future economic growth and job creation. The success of Republican tax relief policies is clear. In contrast, raising taxes — by allowing tax relief to expire or by passing burdensome new tax hikes — would threaten the progress our economy has made and discourage future growth. Democrats should remember the millions of taxpayers who have benefited from the tax relief we’ve passed and work with Republicans to extend the tax relief and reject new taxes.
Are the dems using fear tactics about the Federal buget deficiency? The myth persists in some media circles that the Federal budget deficiency is surging or ballooning or something terrible, all of which is served up as ammunition for those in Congress who want a tax increase.'' As an aside, I make a parenthetical statement and say we are now a little over 1,400 days away from a very, very large tax increase that will happen unless Congress takes action. ``At the risk of being drummed out of the guild, we thought you'd rather have the real story. ``The deficit has in fact declined by some $165 billion over the last 2 fiscal years, and according to the most recent data has continued to fall in the first quarter of fiscal 2007. The latest Treasury estimates for January show that tax receipts in December were $18 billion higher than a year earlier, helping to boost the budget surplus for the month to $40 billion, up from $11 billion a year ago. December is typically a good month for revenues due to year-end tax payments. ``Meanwhile, for the first 3 months of fiscal 2007 through December, revenues climbed 8.1 percent, building on double-digit revenue increases in the previous 2 years. Corporate income taxes were up a remarkable 22.2 percent in the first fiscal quarter, showing that the government continues to grab a nice chunk of rising business profits that so many of our politicians like to deplore. Individual income taxes rose 8.8 percent, thanks to strong wage and salary growth. Much of this revenue comes from `the rich,' believe it or not. ``In the most surprising budget news, Federal spending was nearly flat in the first fiscal quarter. This was despite a 22.1 percent increase in Medicare spending due largely to the new prescription drug benefit, and a 10.7 percent increase in defense spending. Those increases were offset by lower spending for flood insurance and disaster assistance compared with the peaks of post-Katrina payments a year ago. So the first quarter deficit was $85 billion, down sharply from $119 billion a year earlier. ``All in all, despite huge outlays for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Nation's fiscal picture is brightening. We hate to ruin the press corps's day with such cheerful news, but there it is.'' federal budget deficit and deficiency are two different things. the better the deficiency (or lack of) the lower the deficit.
the bloated welfare states of France and Sweden have lower corporate rates and generally better corporate tax? Now that recession-warning lights have begun to blink, Democrats should give tax hikes a rest. As tax-happy Democrats might have noticed, the stock market resembles a kindergartner on a swing set: half-giddy, half-scared, and hyperactive. Meanwhile, payrolls sagged by 4,000 positions last month. Not since August 2003 has America created no new jobs. Fifty-two economists in September 13’s Wall Street Journal offered a 36-percent average probability of recession by next September, up from 28-percent in August. Oil hit $81.93 per-barrel Wednesday — hardly good news. And the tumultuous home-mortgage industry suffered 243,497 foreclosure listings last month, up 115-percent versus August 2006, RealtyTrac.com reports. This mess triggered 12,000 layoffs, just at lender Countrywide Financial Corp. To prevent tight credit from suffocating the economy, the Federal Reserve Board Tuesday hastily administered a 0.5-percent federal-funds-rate reduction. Amid these worrisome omens and genuine human suffering, the last thing America needs is for congressional Democrats to stuff a pillow over the economy’s face. But they can’t control themselves. “Through 2012, the Democratic Congress’ new budget raises taxes $217 billion,” the National Taxpayers Union’s Pete Sepp calculates. “If no surpluses appear that year, another $175.5 billion tax hike automatically kicks in.” This $392.5 billion includes a halving of the per-child tax credit, restoration of the marriage penalty, a 50-percent leap in the low-income tax bracket (10-percent under Republicans; 15-percent under Democrats), and the resurrection of the Death Tax — from 0 to 55-percent. After August’s tragic Minneapolis bridge collapse, House Transportation chairman James Oberstar (D., Minn.) proposed a “temporary” nickel-a-gallon federal gasoline-tax increase. Never mind that existing gas-tax revenues vanish into narcissistic pork projects rather than urgent infrastructure repairs. Such a tax hike would “cost American motorists an estimated $25 billion over the next three years,” NTU reckons. Democrats cannot plea that soaring deficits require tax hikes to absorb red ink. Indeed, the federal budget gap narrowed from $413 billion in 2004 to $158 billion today, proving that the best deficit medicine nearly always is to limit taxes and consequently unleash American enterprise. A thinner federal slice of a bigger economic pie usually yields revenues exceeding pre-tax-cut levels. Federal receipts have zoomed 7-percent this year. “The tax cuts are working exactly as intended,” Heritage Foundation analyst Brian Riedl argues. “Lower tax rates have increased the incentives to work, save, and invest, and as a result, the economy has grown faster than expected.” He adds: “Concerns that the Bush tax cuts would lead to a long-term shortfall of government revenues have proven false …Tax revenues in 2007 are now estimated to be $70 billion above the level projected even before the 2003 tax cuts. In other words, tax revenues are now above their pre-tax cut baseline.” Democrats cannot deny what happened after President Bush and Capitol Hill Republicans slashed maximum capital-gains taxes from 18 to 15-percent in 2003. Rather than dwindle $5.37 billion between 2003 and 2006, as the congressional Joint Tax Committee’s antique, static-analysis model wrongly predicted, revenues actually advanced $53 billion. Foreign economic ministers understand these lessons and are lowering taxes as if Franklin Roosevelt never lived and Ronald Reagan never died. “Sweden and Russia last year eliminated their estate taxes because they said the tax was economically counterproductive,” economist Stephen Moore wrote in the August 31 Wall Street Journal. “In Germany under Chancellor Angela Merkel, the corporate tax rate has been reduced to less than 30 percent from 39-percent.” Poland recently chopped its business tax from 27-percent to 19. Even Hanoi gets it! Thanks to corporate-tax relief, “the business environment will become more and more attractive, resulting in increased investment,” Vietnamese tax chief Nguyen Van Ninh told Moore. While America’s corporate tax levitates at 35-percent, seven European Union nations have lowered business levies this year. The EU-average corporate tax is 24.2-percent. “Further corporate tax rate cuts are being implemented in Germany, Estonia, Spain, and the United Kingdom, and rate cuts are being discussed in the Czech Republic and France,” observes Cato Institute senior fellow Dan Mitchell. “Even the bloated welfare states of France and Sweden have lower corporate rates and generally better corporate tax systems than America.” Democrats thus resist global pro-market trends, even among progressive governments long on social solidarity and short on “reckless cowboyism.” But, for most Democrats, these facts and numbers are irrelevant. Taxes are not about merely funding vital government duties and basic public services. They are meant to punish the wealthy, “correct” personal behavior, and distribute universal largesse. Thus, Democrats itch to raise taxes on highly lucrative private-equity partnerships, from 15 to 35-percent. True to form, the Democratic Senate voted in August to hike cigarette taxes 156 percent, from 39 cents to $1 per pack. This would ignite a massive explosion in the State Child Health Insurance Program. The Democratic House extended government medicine to kids in families of four earning quadruple the Federal Poverty Line, or $82,600 — twice today’s threshold. The House also redefined “child” as an eligible boy or girl …up to age 25. While America’s economy clings from a ledge, Democrats dance on its fingertips. When the donkey party promises “change,” it delivers — good and hard.
Under what federal power of the constitution is it written that Healthcare by gunpoint is legal? "Like Clinton (and unlike Obama), Edwards’ health-care plan would require every American to have health insurance. But unlike Clinton, Edwards is now detailing how he would enforce his mandate. Under the Edwards plan, when Americans file their income taxes, they would be required to submit a letter from an insurance provider confirming coverage for themselves and their dependents. If someone did not submit proof of coverage, the Internal Revenue Service would notify a newly established regional or state-based health-care agency (which Edwards has dubbed a Health Care Market). Those regional agencies would then evaluate whether the uninsured individual was eligible for Medicare (which covers those over 65), Medicaid (which covers the indigent), or S-CHIP (the State Children’s Health Insurance Program which targets the working poor). If the individual was not eligible for either of those existing public programs, the regional-health care agency would enroll the individual into the lowest cost health-care plan available in that area. The lowest-cost option could be a new Medicare-like public option or a private insurance plan. The newly covered individual would not only have access to health benefits but would also be responsible for making monthly payments with the help of a tax credit. The exact size of the financial obligation would vary according to a person’s income (lower-income Americans would receive larger tax credits). If a person did not meet his or her monthly financial obligation for a set period of time (perhaps a year, perhaps longer) the Edwards plan would empower the federal government to garnish an individual’s wages for purposes of collecting “back premiums with interest and collection costs.”" http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/11/edwards-garnish.html Amendment X The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Directing tax refund to a different address than what is on W2...? It's a little past due but we're not too worried...my girlfriend needs to file her income tax return and I did a preliminary 1040EZ and she's owed a refund. She lived in NYC during the 2006 work period but moved to NJ in early 2007. She will be filing everything under the old address (in NYC, NY) but can she redirect the Federal/State refund check(s) to her new address which is different from what is on her W2 statement? Does she just use her new address when filling in the Federal & State tax income tax forms?
Will democrats shrink our economy? Expiring tax relief, big spending on the agenda for Congress. When Republicans passed major tax relief packages in 2001 and 2003, we predicted that a booming economy, new jobs for millions of Americans, and an increase in investment and innovation would result. The past several years have proved our theory correct: When government gets out of the way, the American people will get to work. The 2001 and 2003 tax reductions have spurred more than five years of uninterrupted growth. The economy grew at a robust 3.4 percent in the second quarter of 2007. Productivity growth has averaged 2.8 percent since 2001, considerably above the average of each of the past three decades. Since August 2003, our economy has created more than 8.2 million jobs, and the current unemployment rate is just 4.5 percent, lower than the averages of the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s. Wages have been on the rise, and real after-tax income is up 9.9 percent since President Bush took office, an average of nearly $3,000 per person. The tax relief has helped produce an economy that has generated higher than expected tax revenues for the federal government. Tax receipts have risen 37 percent over the last three years and are projected to increase another 7 percent this year. These rising tax receipts have, in turn, helped drive down the deficit, which is projected to drop significantly in 2007 for the third year in a row. The deficit this year is expected to measure just 1.5 percent of GDP, considerably below the average of the last 40 years. The tax relief we passed has had exactly the effect we intended — it has spurred growth and innovation and created jobs and opportunities for millions of Americans. But continuing this growth requires continuing the policies that have produced this growth in the first place. Failing to extend the tax relief we have passed would result in a de facto tax hike that could cripple our economy and undo much of the progress we have made over the last few years. Lowering taxes on income and investment encourages people to work more and invest more, because they get a greater return on their work and investments. This extra work and investment creates new jobs, increases productivity, and encourages innovation and development — in other words, produces economic growth, as we saw with the 2001 and 2003 tax relief. Raising taxes, on the other hand, has the opposite effect. As rates increase, the rewards of labor and investment decrease. People see more of their income and the returns on their investments eaten up by taxes, and this gives them little incentive to work more or invest more. Without new labor and investment, economic growth grinds to a halt, and the economy stagnates. Unfortunately, Democrats have approved a budget that fails to extend the bulk of the 2001 and 2003 tax relief — most of which is set to expire in the next few years — resulting in a staggering tax hike of at least $736 billion. Most notably, the Democrats’ budget fails to extend the lower tax rate on capital gains and dividends and most of the income tax relief we’ve passed, the two provisions that have done the most to spur the strong economic growth of the past several years. In addition to this massive tax hike, Democrats on the House Ways and Means Committee are also proposing another growth-stifling tax hike to pay for alternative minimum tax relief, this one a 4 percent tax hike on higher income Americans and small business owners. Almost 20 million Americans will be liable for the AMT this year if Congress doesn’t act. While Republicans strongly agree that the AMT must be fixed once and for all so that it doesn’t target millions of middle-class families, paying for an AMT fix with a tax hike is not the answer. Raising taxes on these Americans would place a particularly heavy burden on small businesses, most of which are taxed at the individual level. Small businesses employ half of all private sector employees and have been responsible for 60 to 80 percent of the net new jobs created annually over the last ten years. Burdening successful small businesses with significant tax hikes, as the Democrats’ plan would do, would jeopardize future economic growth and job creation. The success of Republican tax relief policies is clear. In contrast, raising taxes — by allowing tax relief to expire or by passing burdensome new tax hikes — would threaten the progress our economy has made and discourage future growth. Democrats should remember the millions of taxpayers who have benefited from the tax relief we’ve passed and work with Republicans to extend the tax relief and reject new taxes.
Any Ron Paul Supporters Agree With This? http://www.house.gov/paul/press/press2007/pr092707.htm Congressman Paul Introduces "The Tax Free Tips Act" September 27, 2007 Washington, DC - Congressman Ron Paul has introduced legislation that would ease the tax burden on some of America ’s hardest workers – those in the service industry. The Tax Free Tips Act of 2007 H.R. 3664 would exempt tips and gratuities from federal income and payroll taxes. Tips often compose a substantial portion of the earnings of waiters, waitresses, and other service-sector employees. However, unlike regular wages, a service-sector employee usually has no guarantee of, or legal right to, a tip. Instead, the amount of a tip usually depends on how well an employee satisfies a client. Since the amount of taxes one pays increases along with the size of tip, taxing tips punishes workers for doing a superior job! Not only that, but the IRS estimates how much in tips an employee should have received and taxes them based on that. This should stop. “Many service-sector employers are young people trying to make money to pay for their education, or single parents struggling to provide for their children. Oftentimes, these workers work two jobs in hopes of making a better life for themselves and their families. The Tax Free Tips Act gives these hard-working Americans an immediate pay raise. People may use this pay raise to devote more resources to their children’s, or their own, education, or to save for a home, retirement, or to start their own businesses,” stated Congressman Paul.
About what can I expect to be looking at for a Tax return this year? I want to know what my Income tax refund would be if 2007 ended with my last paycheck, I a 21 year old SWM with a 7 month old child am in NY but am withholding 0-0 from my paycheck, 1040 gross pay 20,152.39 Deductions Statutory: federal inc tax, 2248.93 Social sec tax 1180.20 Medicare tax, 276.01 NY state income tax 573.86 NY SUI SDI tax 26.40 Deductions Other: CNA addl, D&D 22.00 CNA life, 35.20 Dental, 128.70 Health, 899.80 Monthly Charity, 50.00 Vision, 88.44 3rd party W/H child support, 1384.00 401k, 1215.55 Possible additional Deductible expenses, root canal + Crown, 455 $ about 2,000 in fuel to and from work, no student loans or mortgage, as of yet, no daycare expenses. based off of that information, what can I do to maximize my $ returned to me, and what may that amount be, rough estimates are welcome,... thanks :)
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
