Originally posted by Biigs
reply to post by schuyler
Your assumptions about my knowledge of your tax system is uncalled for, i know enough and i was correct with what i said.
Is that right? Well, then, let us examine what you said and see:
Some how i doubt that a U.S. Tax Consultant would frequent a forum devoted to truth and intellectual debate.....
Gratuitous, unnecessary, with no basis in fact. Tax Consultants perform and unfortunately needed service. There is nothing "evil" about someone trying
to help others navigate the tax laws of a country and no reason to assume they would not be interested in ATS subjects. Your statement is false.
Im glad i haven't worked in the USA, that Tax stuff is like a mine field with IRS waiting to jump out the bushes on you over any honest
mistakes, like a tax ninja.
You say that with no examples at all and having never been subjected to it. A "tax ninja"? Seriously? I'm sure we can all find anecdotal examples, but
in my dealings with the IRS where I have made mistakes they have been very straightforward with me. I have made mistakes that they COULD have
suggested was an attempt at fraud, but they didn't "jump out of the bushes" over MY honest mistakes. They simply said, "Our records don't agree with
yours. Please explain. It looks like you owe some more money." I did this twice (facepalm on me!) and they were right both times. I screwed up
thousands of dollars worth by failing to report interest income. The bank should have sent me a statement. Either they did not or I threw it away. I
should have known better.
Yet when they made a quite substantial mistake themselves a few years ago by mistaking a return of principle on a bond for income, they accepted my
rebuke with grace and professionalism. But I didn't get all upset and yell at them. I just said, "That $12,000 is not income; it is a return of
principle. I already paid taxes on that money." End of story. They said "Okay." I did not need to jump through loopholes or provide more proof. I
could not have been treated better in the situations I just described. They COULD have hassled me. I expected it. They did not.
You WILL pay what you owe, of course, but they are not the inflexible bureaucracy of twenty years ago. Most tax issues are fairly straightforward
unless you have a highly complex return, in which case you need a Tax Consultant. Tax ninjas? C'mon. That's just silly and not at all substantive,
especially for someone who has never experienced the IRS first hand.
I would assume if the person in question has no income, then even if a tax return was not filled in, the Tax men would have no owed money to
pursue anyway. But thats logical and the tax guys are not...
True, but superficial, needlessly accusatory, and not at all what the IRS does. Indeed, if there is zero income, there is no need to file. How does
that make the tax guys illogical again? The rule is just as your assumption states, but you seem hell bent on calling the "tax guys" illogical even
when they're doing what you call logical anyway. Besides, you assume wrong because you did not understand the underlying issue. A few years ago we all
got a substantial tax rebate. If you had no income, in order to get it, you had to file a return.
In Britain we pay car tax yearly of which 10% gets spent on the roads, a big grape here in the UK, taxes not going into improving the
situations. I read up on other country's ways to make sure when i have a say at the ballot box im doing the best for my country.
That's too bad (really). But "reading up on other country's ways" does not provide you with a level of knowledge that dealing with the IRS year after
year for your entire working life does. You haven't provided one scrap of useful information to the issue and the advice you did provide is
That's why Rule #1 applies. Going to you for IRS advice is like going to the dentist for a haircut.
edit on 1/19/2013 by schuyler because: (no