Job Discussion Forums

[bnix]

Sorry,I don't agree with you.The bill they are trying to pass to do us out of the tax exemption is a bald,blatent attempt by a bunch of fat cat politicians(well,we know who is president,not a POOR guy,now is he?) to tax individuals who they see as living overseas and really not having much political clout(maybe they are right,but maybe they are in for a nasty surprise come next presidential election).

Why should I feel "deadbeatish' about not paying any US tax?I have not even SET FOOT in the US in three years.I do not use any of their services...hospital,police or any other since I am living overseas.WHY SHOULD I PAY TAXES? FOR WHAT? TO FINANCE THEIR WARS?

Not only that,but why should I pay taxes when individuals making a lot more money than me($100000 or more a year) are able to avoid all or almost all of their taxes through tax shelters whuch basically only the rich can afford to take advantage of?And these people are living in the US and taking advantage of government services!

And Arioch,I cannot agree that it will affect very,very few individuals.Sure,those people who are not making any money at all,so to speak,working in China, eastern Europe or Latin America...will not have to pay anything because basically they are not making anything...or almost nothing.

For those of you who are interested in your own financial welfare,take Veiled Sentiments's(a person who knows what he/she is talking about!) and contact your congressperson(representative) and ask him or her to oppose Bill HR2,and also include the comment Veiled S.made in his/her post.

This is just about the last straw!

[Joe C.]

[bnix]

Well.I do agree with you on one thing.If Mr.Bush manages to win the next presidential election by a "substantial majority",it will be a (VERY) nasty surprise.Personally,I do not think so.I surely hope not.As to your statements"Sure we know who is president.We also know why he is and why one who shares your opinions isn't".Well,actually,I never had the ambition to be pres.in the first place. As to why he is pres.well,I don't know...there was that little debacle with the vote counting in Florida...everybody getting egg all over their faces...hurry up guys!!!...SOMEONE has to win this thing. so the Supreme(?) Court got involved...and bingo...we have a president...but not by popular vote...and there were other things...too.Conspiracy...no...those are YOUR words,not mine.No conspiracy...just plain, downright incompetence...and hurry up guys,because the world is looking on and it does not look so good !!!...so SOMEBODY had to win...

As for your suggestion that I renounce my citizenship.Who are you to tell me that?You sound like one of these guys that is always prating on over the forum" If you don't like it in(fill in the blank)just leave!" I think I will follow my own wishes.Somehow I do not feel an overwhelming need to win your approval.

As for all those fine citizerns in the US doing their civic duties,being upright,law abiding,citizens.Well,of course some are.But of course,some could care less about civic duties...being good citizens,etc.They are just interested in making as much moola as they can.Civic duties indeed!
Maybe you have been out of the country even longer than me!

[bnix]

A mere typo.Any way,as the computer on the old Star Trek episode said,your "logic" is "faulty,faulty.faulty".And I do not intend on renouncing my US citizenship soon,merely based on your advice! I can see it now."Why have you decided to renounce your citizenship,Mr.B.?" "Well...this man on Dave's Cafe told me I should do it....so...."

[MindTraveller]

Ages ago, sometime after 1984, the US tried to tax expats. What happened instead was that the ceiling was lowered from $80,000 to $60,000. Right now it's $80,000 again. So we just might have the same result.

The non-reporting threat, or non-filing IRS return threat, is that you won't be allowed to collect Social Security or any other Social Security benefits if you don't account for those years. This may not seem important to young people, but the older you get, the more real this becomes.

When I started EFLing in 1984, the IRS didn't pay much attention to ex-pats. Filing wasn't such a big deal. Since then, things have changed. I'm sure computer tracking has made finding us easier.

[bnix]

Yes,computer tracking has made it easier for the IRS to keep track of expats(and other US taxpayers,too).Besides,there are more people in the TESOL field than in 1984...so it is to their advantage to keep track of people.Note,I am NOT saying they will always catch everyone.i would not try to fool them.Even when I have taught in countries where my income did not mmet the minimum reprtable standard,I had my CPA file a return anyway.That way,if any questions come up in the future.Did you file a tax retrun in 1999?Yes,I did...and I can easily get a copy.Cover yourselves.Woo knows,some of you may be back in the US,working at a regular job....making good bucks and you get audited for some other reason...and "By the way...where were you in 2003?Teaching in Korea?Well,did you file a tax return for that year?" COVER YOURSELVES!Also,keep copies of all of your contracts,airline tickets for foreign travel and any other papers you think might be helpful in the future for tax purposes.

[scot47]

There was also some discussion on this possibility by those creeps who run Her Majesty's Government. Some while back under my old school chum, Gordon Brown, they published some "discussion papers" about taxing the incomes of those of us who have fled Perfidious Albion for warmer and gentler climes.

Nothing came of it then but some civil servant may well produce it one day as a "brilliant new initiative".

If it does happen I shall renounce my UK nationality - even if legally that is not possible. (UK Nationality Law does not recognise the concept of "loss of citizenship". That is how they managed to get the Irishman Joyce for High Treason ! He had once possessed UK nationality !)

[johnslat]

Dear scot47,
Wow - I knew that James Joyce deserved a LOT of punishment for writing Ulysses and Finnegan's Wake. But I never realized they got him for High Treason.
Regards,
John

[scot47]

Any more uppity answers from people here and I shall recommend the same penalty.

[johnslat]

Dear scot47,
Hear! Hear!
Regards,
John

[Sherri]

Looks like good news!
http://www.iht.com/articles/97257.html

important quote:
"And it does not eliminate the $80,000 tax exemption for the 4.1 million Americans living abroad - a cut that was added in the Senate but dropped during conference committee negotiations."

The article in full...

Bush says he'll sign the tax-cut bill, as Democrats disparage it
�
Joel Brinkley NYT
Friday, May 23, 2003



WASHINGTONPresident George W. Bush promised Thursday to sign the $318 billion tax-cut bill congressional negotiators agreed to late Wednesday, even though it offers less than half the tax relief he wanted.
.Only last month, Bush belittled the Senate for proposing a tax cut of this amount, saying, "If they agree that tax relief creates jobs, then why are they for a little-bitty tax-relief package?" But on a rare visit to Capitol Hill on Thursday, Bush extolled the congressional agreement and, with no reference to his previous criticism, he said: "This bill I am going to sign is good for American workers, it is good for American families, it is good for American investors and it's good for American entrepreneurs and small-business owners."
.The bill reduces taxes on dividends and capital gains, at least temporarily. It accelerates income-tax rate reductions that were to be phased in later as a result of the 2001 tax cut. It increases the deductions for investments by small businesses. It provides aid to state governments hurt by the financial downturn.
.And it does not eliminate the $80,000 tax exemption for the 4.1 million Americans living abroad - a cut that was added in the Senate but dropped during conference committee negotiations.
.Democrats, not surprisingly, lamented the agreement. "The bill misses a real opportunity to get the economy back on track and help Americans who are struggling," said the Senate Democratic leader, Tom Daschle. "Instead it gives away billions to those who need it least and does very little for those who need it most."
.Some of those who Daschle said "need it least" attended a major fund-raiser Wednesday night at which Bush asserted, "Our most urgent mission in the months ahead is to strengthen this economy." He raised $22 million for the National Republican Congressional Committee and its Senate counterpart from Republican loyalists who paid $2,500 each to attend.
.On Thursday, Bush left for Texas for a long holiday weekend, his third long weekend there in the last month. Monday is Memorial Day. Friday, Bush is to meet with Junichiro Koizumi, the Japanese prime minister, and high among the topics of conversation will be putting pressure on North Korea.
.But the primary subjects of discussion in the capital Thursday were financial. Senate Republican leaders promised to vote by the week's end to increase the national debt limit, an act made necessary by the government's ballooning deficit. Last month, the House approved a $984 billion increase, the largest ever. And as the measure moved to the Senate for approval, Democrats pounced on it, calling it an example of Republican hypocrisy. "On the one hand they are asking for the biggest increase in the debt limit in the history of our nation," said Senator Kent Conrad of North Dakota, the senior Democrat on the Senate Budget Committee, "and on the other hand they are asking for a tax cut that will only make the situation worse going forward."
.The Treasury has been juggling funds and using accounting tricks since February to stay below the debt limit, But it said last week that by May 28 it would have exhausted "all prudent and legal steps" to avoid an unprecedented federal default. To make their point, Democrats say they will support a debt-limit increase of only $350 billion. That would force the Republicans to bring up the unpopular issue again in the autumn.
.Bush said nothing about the debt-limit debate in his visit to Capitol Hill, but he did explain why he believes the tax cut is important. "The principle of the bill is pretty simple: that we believe the more money people have in their pockets the more likely it is somebody is going to be able to find work in America," he said. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office and many economists have said the tax cut is likely to do little in the near term to produce new jobs or stimulate the economy. The New York Times
< < Back to Start of Article
WASHINGTON President George W. Bush promised Thursday to sign the $318 billion tax-cut bill congressional negotiators agreed to late Wednesday, even though it offers less than half the tax relief he wanted.
.
Only last month, Bush belittled the Senate for proposing a tax cut of this amount, saying, "If they agree that tax relief creates jobs, then why are they for a little-bitty tax-relief package?" But on a rare visit to Capitol Hill on Thursday, Bush extolled the congressional agreement and, with no reference to his previous criticism, he said: "This bill I am going to sign is good for American workers, it is good for American families, it is good for American investors and it's good for American entrepreneurs and small-business owners."
.
The bill reduces taxes on dividends and capital gains, at least temporarily. It accelerates income-tax rate reductions that were to be phased in later as a result of the 2001 tax cut. It increases the deductions for investments by small businesses. It provides aid to state governments hurt by the financial downturn.
.
And it does not eliminate the $80,000 tax exemption for the 4.1 million Americans living abroad - a cut that was added in the Senate but dropped during conference committee negotiations.
.
Democrats, not surprisingly, lamented the agreement. "The bill misses a real opportunity to get the economy back on track and help Americans who are struggling," said the Senate Democratic leader, Tom Daschle. "Instead it gives away billions to those who need it least and does very little for those who need it most."
.
Some of those who Daschle said "need it least" attended a major fund-raiser Wednesday night at which Bush asserted, "Our most urgent mission in the months ahead is to strengthen this economy." He raised $22 million for the National Republican Congressional Committee and its Senate counterpart from Republican loyalists who paid $2,500 each to attend.
.
On Thursday, Bush left for Texas for a long holiday weekend, his third long weekend there in the last month. Monday is Memorial Day. Friday, Bush is to meet with Junichiro Koizumi, the Japanese prime minister, and high among the topics of conversation will be putting pressure on North Korea.
.
But the primary subjects of discussion in the capital Thursday were financial. Senate Republican leaders promised to vote by the week's end to increase the national debt limit, an act made necessary by the government's ballooning deficit. Last month, the House approved a $984 billion increase, the largest ever. And as the measure moved to the Senate for approval, Democrats pounced on it, calling it an example of Republican hypocrisy. "On the one hand they are asking for the biggest increase in the debt limit in the history of our nation," said Senator Kent Conrad of North Dakota, the senior Democrat on the Senate Budget Committee, "and on the other hand they are asking for a tax cut that will only make the situation worse going forward."
.
The Treasury has been juggling funds and using accounting tricks since February to stay below the debt limit, But it said last week that by May 28 it would have exhausted "all prudent and legal steps" to avoid an unprecedented federal default. To make their point, Democrats say they will support a debt-limit increase of only $350 billion. That would force the Republicans to bring up the unpopular issue again in the autumn.
.
Bush said nothing about the debt-limit debate in his visit to Capitol Hill, but he did explain why he believes the tax cut is important. "The principle of the bill is pretty simple: that we believe the more money people have in their pockets the more likely it is somebody is going to be able to find work in America," he said. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office and many economists have said the tax cut is likely to do little in the near term to produce new jobs or stimulate the economy. The New York Times
WASHINGTON President George W. Bush promised Thursday to sign the $318 billion tax-cut bill congressional negotiators agreed to late Wednesday, even though it offers less than half the tax relief he wanted.
.
Only last month, Bush belittled the Senate for proposing a tax cut of this amount, saying, "If they agree that tax relief creates jobs, then why are they for a little-bitty tax-relief package?" But on a rare visit to Capitol Hill on Thursday, Bush extolled the congressional agreement and, with no reference to his previous criticism, he said: "This bill I am going to sign is good for American workers, it is good for American families, it is good for American investors and it's good for American entrepreneurs and small-business owners."
.
The bill reduces taxes on dividends and capital gains, at least temporarily. It accelerates income-tax rate reductions that were to be phased in later as a result of the 2001 tax cut. It increases the deductions for investments by small businesses. It provides aid to state governments hurt by the financial downturn.
.
And it does not eliminate the $80,000 tax exemption for the 4.1 million Americans living abroad - a cut that was added in the Senate but dropped during conference committee negotiations.
.
Democrats, not surprisingly, lamented the agreement. "The bill misses a real opportunity to get the economy back on track and help Americans who are struggling," said the Senate Democratic leader, Tom Daschle. "Instead it gives away billions to those who need it least and does very little for those who need it most."
.
Some of those who Daschle said "need it least" attended a major fund-raiser Wednesday night at which Bush asserted, "Our most urgent mission in the months ahead is to strengthen this economy." He raised $22 million for the National Republican Congressional Committee and its Senate counterpart from Republican loyalists who paid $2,500 each to attend.
.
On Thursday, Bush left for Texas for a long holiday weekend, his third long weekend there in the last month. Monday is Memorial Day. Friday, Bush is to meet with Junichiro Koizumi, the Japanese prime minister, and high among the topics of conversation will be putting pressure on North Korea.
.
But the primary subjects of discussion in the capital Thursday were financial. Senate Republican leaders promised to vote by the week's end to increase the national debt limit, an act made necessary by the government's ballooning deficit. Last month, the House approved a $984 billion increase, the largest ever. And as the measure moved to the Senate for approval, Democrats pounced on it, calling it an example of Republican hypocrisy. "On the one hand they are asking for the biggest increase in the debt limit in the history of our nation," said Senator Kent Conrad of North Dakota, the senior Democrat on the Senate Budget Committee, "and on the other hand they are asking for a tax cut that will only make the situation worse going forward."
.
The Treasury has been juggling funds and using accounting tricks since February to stay below the debt limit, But it said last week that by May 28 it would have exhausted "all prudent and legal steps" to avoid an unprecedented federal default. To make their point, Democrats say they will support a debt-limit increase of only $350 billion. That would force the Republicans to bring up the unpopular issue again in the autumn.
.
Bush said nothing about the debt-limit debate in his visit to Capitol Hill, but he did explain why he believes the tax cut is important. "The principle of the bill is pretty simple: that we believe the more money people have in their pockets the more likely it is somebody is going to be able to find work in America," he said. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office and many economists have said the tax cut is likely to do little in the near term to produce new jobs or stimulate the economy. The New York Times

[Stephen Jones]

Scot, you're wrong abut Lord Haw Haw. He never possessed British citizenship. That might have presented somewhat of a problem when it came to indicting him for treason, but never underestimate the ability of the British legal system pervert the truth in the greater cause of stringing up somebody you don't like.

Joyce was convicted because he had led people to believe he was British.

In case any illegal immigrants here are thinking of leaving people under the impression they are British in order to get an EU passport or a free pass to watch the filming of East Enders, I have to point out that the said ploy is only valid for purposes of being hanged by the neck until dead, and gives no other advantages whatsoever. Indeed under Blunkett's new nationality law even being British offers little security.

[Glenski]

Thanks to Sherri for posting the most up to date (and thankfully positive) news.

Just to add my 2 cents from Japan...

Americans must file every year. It's a law, even if you have nothing to declare, or if your income is exempt. So I do. And, on my low teacher's salary, I have not had to pay any tax.

I have no house/apartment back in the USA. My belongings are in a storage unit, and I have sold my car. My money sits there and in Japan, but I haven't sent home a penny in years. I am taxed by Japanese law (and covered by Japanese health insurance), and I am satisfied with that.

Whether I have intentions of going back to the US or not is irrelevant in my opinion. I am still a US citizen, but my income comes from a Japanese source, and in my situation, I don't feel I should have to pay US taxes on that income. So, I was very pleased with the current tax policy that allows me to write off my Japanese income. The limit, as stated earlier, is about US$80,000 (it was slightly less when I arrived in Japan, about $72,000). However, anyone who makes this amount by teaching English is a rarity. Most people make about $25,000.

I was quite upset that my meager, Japanese income was in jeopardy of being taxed twice. I'm very glad that that attempt has been thwarted, even if it is only temporarily. Writing off my Japanese taxes onto my US tax forms is a pitiful expense, so I don't see what I gain by doing that. With a $25,000 salary, I pay no US taxes, and in my situation (which is similar to many EFL teachers in Japan) I don't feel I should. If Bush's plan had gone through, my small income (which totally supports me and my wife in our Japanese apartment and Japanese-bought car, and which does not even see the doors of a US bank) should not be taxed by the US. I hope this bill stays dead. It is not fair.

[bnix]

Technically,you do not HAVE to file a tax return(US Federal) if you are working overseas,and your income falls below a certain level($7,700 annual income if you are single and under 65).If you are 65 or older and/or are married,the limit is more.This information is taken from IRS Form 2002 1040(Forms and Instructions for Overseas Filers)page 17(Filing Requirements,Do You Have to File?).So filing is not mandatory for some people,although the income limits probably limit( ) that provision to people working in places like eastern Europe.

That said,even if your income falls below the limit,it is not a bad idea to file,anyway,just for your peace of mind,and in case the IRS takes a look at all of your returns in the future...when you might be working a "regular" job and making more money.I know,I know...but some people DO leave and get other(and in some cases) better paying jobs.

Glenski,I really think the plan for a tax increase for Americans working overseas is dead.Thank goodness! Best news we have had for a long time.

[johnslat]

Dear Stephen,
Well, apparently he had a British passport, though:
" Although Joyce was born in the USA, brought up in Ireland and took German nationality on 26 September 1939, he was charged with treason from 3 September 1939 to 2 July 1940, the date his British passport ran out, and sentenced to death. "

http://www.heretical.com/British/joyce.html

I suspect Vonnegut may have had Lord Haw Haw at least in the back of his mind when he wrote " Mother Night ", a very thought-provoking novel, and, I'd say, one of his most unusual, given the topic:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0385334141/104-0945542-4651959?vi=glance

Regards,
John