The expression “but in the world nothing can be said to be certain except death and taxes” has once again proved resilient as a man in Mississippi has been convicted of not filing tax returns from 2002-2005. This occurred after he filed a civil lawsuit for $1.1 billion against the IRS claiming Congress did not have the authority to tax.
We really don’t have much experience in taking on the government over the constitutionality of taxes but conventional wisdom would probably suggest that if you’re going to sue the IRS for a billion dollars, not filing your tax returns in order to prove your point is not going to help your case.
Pearl man convicted of tax evasion [Clarion Ledger via TaxProf Blog]
Related Posts
IRS Commish Reminds Congress That If They Blow Off Tax Policy, We’ll Have a Giant Mess on Our Hands
- Caleb Newquist
- December 2, 2010
There’s a small part of us that hopes the lame-o Congress just throws their hands up and lets all the outstanding tax policy issues expire, just to see what the fallout would be.
While we wish no harm to our practitioner friends like Joe Kristan, watching the pols in Congress squirm from the wrath of the American populace would be rather enjoyable.
Doug Shulman, on the other hand, does not share our impish impulses and wrote a letter to Congressional members on the Senate Finance and House Ways & Mean Committees, reminding them that if they let this one get away, his agency will have one hell of a mess on their hands.
Reuters has some excerpts:
“Of course, if legislation has not passed by the end of this year, our computers will have been programed incorrectly and we will need to delay filing for these individuals,” he said in a letter to the top lawmakers on the congressional committees charged with tax policy.
Realizing that the members might not quite understand what all this crazy-talk means, the Commish gave some details:
“It would be an unprecedented and daunting operational challenge to open the tax filing season under one set of tax laws with respect to AMT and extenders, begin accepting tax returns, and then have the law change,” Shulman wrote.
So essentially, re-doing a bunch of work. Nobody wants that. Luckily for everyone involved, Shulman appears to understand that while dysfunction is standard operating procedure on the Hill, most CPAs prefer providing above average client service.
Share this:
Homebuyer Credit to Continue Helping People Get into Crazy Debt?
- Caleb Newquist
- October 29, 2009
Maybe! The opportunity to take advantage of the current credit expires on November 30th. Luckily, the brain trust known as the U.S. Senate is all over this and is going to get a new plan in place come hell or high water.
The best part is that under the Senate’s latest proposal, the credit will now be “extended beyond first time buyers,” as reported by Bloomberg.
So, if you’ve lived in your current shack for five years and you’re looking to upgrade, you’ll be eligible for a $6,500 credit. First time homebuyers will still receive an $8,000 The new extension of the credit would be available for home purchases under contract by April 30, 2010 and close by the end of June.
But that’s not all! Under the new plan, the credit would be available for individuals earning $125k up from $75k and couples earning $250k up from $150k. Presumably more McMansions will get purchased this way.
More good news: this thing has bipartisan support:
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, agreed that most lawmakers support the unemployment and homebuyer measures. “We’re not that far away from an agreement,” he said earlier today.
Who knew it was possible? The problem is, not everyone thinks this is a good idea, including Joe Kristan over at Tax Update Blog:
It’s nice to know that a majority of the millionaires in the Senate think it’s wise to spend $40,000 to $80,000 of our money for each new home sale caused by the credit, even though the credit is rife with fraud.
The credit extension would be tied to an extension of unemployment benefits; the provisions may still be changed, and it has to be reconciled with a House bill that has no homebuyer credit provision.
If they extend it this time, does anybody believe they won’t try to extend it again every time it is set to expire?
And Tax Girl:
Does that cover everybody? Does everyone get a tax credit now? Cause we wouldn’t want to be handing out that free money and leave someone out.
My concern is that if people need the credit to get into a first home or move up to a larger one, are they getting in over their heads in debt? And isn’t that what got us into the economic trouble we’re in now?
Call us party poopers but we’ll go with accountants over the U.S. Senate any day.
Homebuyer Credit Extension a Done Deal? NOL Carrybacks Enhanced? [Tax Update Blog]
First Time Homebuyer’s Credit Likely Expanded [Tax Girl]
Reconfigured home buyer tax credit [Don’t Mess With Taxes]
Also see: Lawmakers Find A Way To Outfox 4-Year Old Tax Cheats [DB]
Share this:
That Orangey Glow Will Be a Little More Expensive Today as Tanning Tax Takes Effect
- Caleb Newquist
- July 1, 2010
Everyone in the melanoma-for-sale business is perplexed about the tanning tax that goes into effect today and the Journal reports that the hella confusion is mostly about why some businesses are able to dodge the tax while others are not.
Case in point, health clubs get to offer their George Hamilton specials tax free while video stores (?) that offer tanning do not.
When Jeanne Chamberlain turns up at work Thursday, she’s going to have to grapple with America’s first federal tax on tanning services, a 10% levy designed to help pay for Congress’s health-care overhaul.
Ms. Chamberlain runs a video-rental store.
These would normally be unrelated facts, but 20 years ago, Ms. Chamberlain followed a number of her peers in adding tanning services to smooth out the bumps in her Rice Lake, Wis., business. Today, she wants to offer one free tan for every three rentals. Should that freebie be taxed? Ms. Chamberlain doesn’t know, and even if she did, she doesn’t yet have the software in place to help with the calculations.
For starters, video stores still exist? We had just assumed that they had gone out with powdered wigs. Netflix, Hulu, etc. etc. And since when do they offer tanning services? “Oh I see you’ve got Gigli there, great choice. Would like to hop in one of our tanning beds while I rewind the tape?”
Anyway, back to the tax:
Among the new details: “qualified physical fitness facilities” that include access to tanning beds as part of their membership fee won’t be subject to the tax.
That means customers at Sun Tan City in Owensboro, Ky., will pay 10% more for a dose of ultraviolet rays. But if they go to Anytime Fitness 100 yards away, and tan inside one of its two beds, they’ll escape.
“My jaw dropped,” said Rick Kueber, founder and chief executive of Sun Tan City, a 124-outlet chain based in Elizabethtown, Ky. Then he got to thinking. “If I had six treadmills in each of my stores, can I call myself a health club?”
Can anyone explain this? Our best guess is that since health clubs force you to get you off your ass, while video stores put you back on them, they’re getting a break. That seems to be pretty advanced for Congress logic but we’ll assume that it’s in the ballpark.
But It’s really NBD for the committed to skin cancer crowd however, “[Fifteen-year-old Grace] McCleary and others who lounged last week in the notorious Land of the Tanned – see MTV’s Jersey Shore – said a few dollars tacked on wouldn’t deter them.”
Fortunately, the IRS has advice (as it always does) for those affected and our resident tax sage, Joe Kristan has the details. So, there’s no risk to the industry as a whole – thank god – just a little extra bureaucracy in the pot in the form of Form 720. Enjoy!
Federal Tan Tax Burns Some Badly but Keeps Everybody in the Dark [WSJ]
Tanning-bed enthusiasts say tax won’t deter them [Philadelphia Inquirer]