BP Holdings Tax Management on Taxes and their Original Intents

Tax is designed to generate enough revenue to sustain essential public service, such as public safety, civil infrastructure for communication and transportation and basic health services. When you see a government hospital, you know your taxes support the upkeep of that institution. And when you see soldiers fighting in battlefields, you can be sure tax money went into training them and keeping them fit and equipped to preserve our national security.

As essential as tax is to our national existence, many do not know the true value of what taxes can do other than what we have mentioned above. Here are some generally unknown facts about taxes and what you need to do to make full use of their benefits:

1. Taxes should not favour one group over another

Taxes are intended to be neutral and must not cater to any one sector or group of people over another. Neither should it impose or interfere with individual decision-making.

What this signifies is that taxes, as they were originally conceived, had an altruistic purpose meant to benefit people equally without favoring any individual or any societal unit. It is a fund to provide services and public amenities for all people alike. So, whether you earn only so much or make millions, you walk or drive over the same road or bridge that taxes helped to build. We cannot discount the goodwill and welfare taxes have brought to both ancient and modern societies.

Pay your taxes so you can enjoy them

2. Taxes must be predictable

In order for a government to function well, it must have some stability in terms of its fiscal health. Without the necessary funds to run a government, chaos would ensue. And so, taxes must flow into a state’s coffers at a regular schedule and at a reasonably predictable amount or the oil will run out at a time when the engine of progress badly needs it.

Now, we understand why the state imposes and does not merely request that taxes be paid at a particular time of the year. Why April for many countries? It is the time of the year when people have probably paid off last year’s debts or recovered from the expenses of the holiday season in the previous year. It is also the time when most parents have extra cash because their children are on school vacation. Unfortunately, it is also the time when many people want to spend a vacation. So, it is either you pay your tax or spend a nice vacation during spring for most people.

3. Taxes must be simple

Assessment and computation of tax and determination should be easily understood by the average taxpayer. But this has been forgotten by tax officials in recent years. It has not only become more complex in terms of schedule as the tax calendar seems to unending nowadays, it has also become so hard to decipher through the many pages now incorporated in the tax return. The best thing to do, if you have extra cash is to let an accountant do your tax.

4. Taxes must not be forced but enforced to encourage voluntary compliance

The key is convenience. As much as possible, it is the tax officials’ duty to encourage voluntary compliance among taxpayers through creative implementation without making people feel they are being harassed or unduly burdened. Ordinary taxpayers have to go through a lot of stress figuring out forms and lining up to pay their tax. Perhaps, a more convenient way can be implemented using modern technology and the banking system. If we can pay bills in malls or online now, why cannot tax be paid in the same way?

5. Taxes earmarked for specific purposes must result in direct benefits

Certain taxes, such as gasoline tax for road maintenance, must be dedicated to the particular purpose they were intended based on a direct cost-benefit link. Today, much of the corruption in government circles arise from misappropriating taxes or diverting them from their intended purposes, thus, losing sight of the original intent of the tax.

What can the taxpayer do to prevent these things from happening? Aside from joining protest rallies or talking to your congress representative, you can actually form or join small groups that could create awareness among people through the media or Internet. This is already being done on Facebook and Twitter. How effective it is may be hard to measure; but time will come when a critical mass of concerned people will have a force of a virtual army that can change the tide of events in a society.

Inevitable as taxes may be, enjoying their ultimate benefits can be a much better motivation that spending our time looking for ways to avoid them.

BP Holdings Tax Management: Prosecutions against tax evaders to rise as taxman tightens fraud rules

Accountants argue changes to the way tax fraud is investigated will lead to more prosecutions against tax evaders

A rule change quietly introduced by HM Revenue & Customs has blocked people accused of tax fraud from trying to clear their names before a criminal or civil investigation is launched.

Previously taxpayers who believed they were innocent had the option to co-operate with HMRC and were invited to supply evidence to support their innocence.

But this option has been phased out. Instead individual’s have two options: either admit or deny the allegations made. Those who plead ‘not guilty’ will be investigated straight away, which could lead to a prison sentence.

During the investigation the taxman will be able to obtain information from third parties, including banks, credit card providers, employers and other government agencies such as the Land Registry.

Accountants warned the move will lead to a “significant” increase in the number of criminal prosecutions against tax evaders, which has already been rising at an alarming pace in recent years as HMRC toughens up its approach to tax collection.

A total of 165 people were jailed in 2010, but in 2013 the number had jumped to 1,165. The rise coincides with HMRC hiring an extra 200 tax investigators over the past three years, taking the total headcount above 1,600.

Andrew Watt, a partner at Watt Busfield Tax Investigations, said: “Prohibiting taxpayers from denying the suspected tax fraud and co-operating with the revenue’s enquiries will only lead to one thing – a significant rise in the number of prosecutions.

“The taxman is determined to catch the tax evaders and rightly so, but my concern is that people who believe they are innocent will be worried out of their minds as they will subjected to a criminal investigation that cannot be fought until it goes to the courts.”

Other accountants also flagged concerns that innocent taxpayers will face unnecessary stress.

James Bullock, of tax firm Pinsent Masons, said: “Those who want to deny the claims made will be unduly stressed in facing what is now a very unfair process. It is a subtle tactic but one which fits in with the new tougher regime the taxman is carrying out, which will inevitably lead to more criminal prosecutions.”

Cases that could result in a prison sentence mainly involve cases of obvious tax fraud, such as undeclared taxable income and gains in offshore accounts. Individuals who use undisclosed tax avoidance arrangements are also targeted.

A spokesman for HMRC said the rule change has been made to make the tax system easier to understand.

“Removal of the denial option does not adversely impact anyone who believes they have nothing to disclose. This is about streamlining our approach to evasion and making the tax system more transparent. It makes things simpler for those who want to bring their affairs up to date while making things harder for committed tax cheats,” the spokesman said.

BP Holdings Tax Management, Balley Price Holdings: How I Dodged a Phony IRS Tax Scam

One morning last week when I answered the phone, a woman at the other end of the line told me she was with the IRS and that I was being investigated. My immediate reaction was panic. But as the caller started telling me why I supposedly was in trouble, I quickly realized that scammers — not the IRS — were targeting me.

Before I recount the conversation, let me emphasize that the best course of action to take when a scammer calls is to hang up. Period. I stayed on the line out of professional curiosity. I hoped to gain more insight into the nature of the con that I could share with Kiplinger readers — and I did. Here’s how I recognized the scam.

The woman on the phone told me that a variety of charges were being filed against me for failing to pay taxes and attempting to defraud the IRS. She asked if I had a criminal attorney to represent me. “No,” I answered. Then she said I owed $4,000. None of what she was saying added up, but it was easy to see how her accusations and efforts at intimidation could rattle many an unsuspecting taxpayer.

I was fortunate because I knew that what the woman was saying sounded familiar to a scam I had written about in November 2013, IRS Warns of a New Phone Scam. The IRS had issued a warning that scammers were calling people, telling them that they owed money and threatening that they would be arrested if they didn’t pay. To resolve the issue, victims typically were being told to pay the money owed to the IRS through a pre-loaded debit card or a wire transfer. But the scammer didn’t get that far with me.

From past run-of-the-mill dealings with the IRS and articles I’ve written for Kiplinger, I knew that the IRS initiates contact with taxpayers by mail, not by phone. And I knew that if I truly were being audited, the process would have begun with a letter and that I would’ve been asked to supply the IRS with records. I certainly wouldn’t be charged with anything before actually having an opportunity to make a case for any questionable items on a tax return.

So I asked the woman if the IRS had attempted to contact me by mail. She said it had. I followed up by asking to what address letters had been sent. She rattled off my former address. When I told her that wasn’t my current address and that I had received other correspondence recently from the IRS (tax forms, not audit notifications) at my current address, she hung up.

I felt victorious but realized how easily someone without my knowledge of tax scams could have been duped. Tax fraud often tops the Federal Trade Commission’s list of biggest identity-theft complaints. And the IRS sees countless scams meant to trick taxpayers into revealing personal information.

That’s why it’s important to be aware of tell-tale signs of IRS-related scams:

Callers claiming to be IRS agents. As I mentioned above, the IRS initiates contact with taxpayers by mail, not by phone. If you get a call from someone claiming to be with the IRS, don’t reveal any personal information or credit-card information because the IRS doesn’t ask for payments over the phone. Instead, hang up and call the IRS at 1-800-829-1040 to see if an agent has a legitimate need to contact you.

Unsolicited e-mails from the IRS. Not only will the IRS not initiate contact with taxpayers by phone, but also it won’t use e-mail, text messages or social media. So do not reply to unsolicited e-mails or messages supposedly from the IRS, open any attachments (which could contain viruses) or click on any links (which could take you to a fraudulent Web site). Forward all suspect e-mails to phishing@irs.gov.

By Cameron Huddleston

 

BP Holdings Tax Management: Finansiell Tips som slår til besparelser

Personlig økonomi tips: Kjøp som slår til besparelser, og mer

Tre toppen stykke finansiell rådgivning, fra å bygge en college-fond å beskytte deg mot cybercrime

Kjøp som slår til besparelser

Noen ganger du må bruke penger for å tjene penger, sier Meg Favreau på amerikanske reportasje & verden. Mens nøysom shoppere kan slite over kjøp, kan noen faktisk spare penger i det lange løp. Hvis du bor i et område der det er mulig å avkall en bil, vil kjøpe en sykkel eller transitt pass spare tusenvis i bilen utgifter hvert år. Og med månedlige kabel regninger snitt rundt $123, en engangsinvestering i en TV-streaming enhet som Apple TV, Roku eller Amazon brann kan legge til tusenvis spares årlig. For koffein narkomane er en espressomaskin en smart Kjøp. Mens en “kan koste hvor som helst mellom $100 og $1200,” vil den innledende investeringen lønne seg nedover veien. Tenk: “Hvis du kjøpe en $4 latte 250 dager i året, som er $1 000,” og du ennå ikke har kaffe i helgene.

Hvordan bygge en college-fond

Hvis du planlegger å sende et barn til college en dag, starte sparing nå, sier Dan Caplinger på daglig økonomi. En av de beste verktøyene for å bygge en college-fond er en skatte-vanskeligstilte 529 plan, som lar deg sette bort penger “på en skatte-utsatt basis, betyr at selv om investeringene du velger betaler rente, utbytte, eller andre former for inntekt, ikke du har en umiddelbar skatt regning.” Og hvis pengene betaler for pedagogiske utgifter, undervisning, avgifter eller bolig-selv uttak er skattefri. Bidrag grenser varierer fra stat til stat, men de fleste 529 planer har caps mellom $ 235 000 og $400.000. Det er nok til å “gi de fleste familier alle fleksibilitet de trenger å lagre for sine barns utdanning.”

Beskytt deg mot cybercrime

PIN-koden er ikke bare hvor du må holde trygt, sier Adam Levin på Credit.com. Disse dager, er data brudd en “sikkerhet i livet”. Men kredittkortnumre, e-postadresser og passord er ikke det eneste hackere er “gunning for.” Telefonnumre, viktige datoer, som bursdager og eksamen datoer, personnummer, førerens lisensnumre og med IP-adresser kan alle utnyttes av identitetstyver. Det beste forsvaret er å unngå legge sensitive data på nettet når det er mulig. Men som cybercrime blir et faktum av livet, “det smarteste du kan gjøre er anta verste” og være årvåken om overvåking dine kontoer, kontoutskrifter, og kreditt-rapporter for underskriver av svindel.

Mer informasjon bare Balley Price Holdings

BP Holdings Tax Management: 3 Tipps für die Steuer Attys Gefängniszeit zu vermeiden

Balley Price Holdings – Obwohl es vielleicht zu spät, Paul Daugerdas, der ehemaligen Jenkens & Gilchrist PC-Chef verurteilt wurde am Mittwoch ins Gefängnis für die Koordination der größten bekannte Steuer-Betrug-Regelung in der amerikanischen Geschichte, andere Anwälte können noch Vorsichtsmaßnahmen ergreifen, um sicherzustellen, sie finden nicht das gleiche Schicksal.

Daugerdas wurde verurteilt um zu 15 Jahren im Gefängnis für seine Rolle als das Mastermind hinter der Regelung $ 7 Milliarden zu dienen, die zertifizierte Gesetz Steuerfachangestellte Sanford Millar sagte eindeutig entworfen wurde, um illegal sein.

“Der einfache Grundsatz ist ‘nicht sein ein Gauner, der'” er erzählte Law360. “Was wir hatten ist eindeutig kriminellen Verhaltens von Daugerdas, die ist nicht nur Betrug des Internal Revenue Service, aber auch seinen Partner betrügt. Der Kerl war nur ein schlechter Mensch, wenn Sie mit der Prämisse, die Menschen in kriminelles Verhalten engagieren wollen beginnen, gibt es nichts, das muss gesagt werden, neben “kein Gauner, der sein” anders als “Lass dich nicht erwischen.” “

Staatsanwälte sagen Daugerdas erstellt und implementiert vier Steueroasen für vermögende Kunden, die mehr als $ 7 Milliarden Wert der betrügerischen Steuerabzüge oder Leistungen geführt haben. Er erntete persönlich $ 95 Millionen von der Regelung nach Ansicht der Regierung.

Neben dem Gefängnis ordnete U.S. District Judge William Pauley III auch Daugerdas $ 164,7 Millionen Verfall und $ 371 Millionen im Rahmen der Restitution zu bezahlen. Staatsanwälte hatte eine Strafe von mindestens 20 Jahren im Gefängnis, angefordert, während Daugerdas argumentiert, dass er nicht mehr als 30 Monate dienen sollte.

Daugerdas begann seine Karriere bei Rechnungslegung Firma Arthur Andersen LLP im Jahr 1975. Er arbeitete dort als Partner Steuer bis 1994, als er neben Bedenken zum Rücktritt gezwungen wurde, dass er heimlich Hunderttausende von Dollar an Gebühren für sich abgezweigt hatte, sagte Staatsanwälte.

Ob Sie ein Büro wie Daugerdas oder nur zu lernen, dass die Seile wie ein Sommer zuordnen ausführen, sagte Anwälte und Professoren Law360, die Anwälte beanspruchen einige einfache Vorsichtsmaßnahmen um Ärger zu vermeiden.

Dagegen Sie Ihre Gebührenstruktur

In Fällen unerlaubter Handlung ist es üblich, dass Anwälte berechnen ihre Kunden basierend auf wie viel Geld, die sie wiederherstellen können. Steuer Hilfe jedoch auftreten die Anordnung ein wenig allzu oft.

“All das Gerede von einer Abkehr von der Stundensatz ist”, sagte Robert Rosen, der beruflichen Verantwortung an der University of Miami School of Law lehrt. “In dieser Regelung war Jenkens einen Prozentsatz der Gewinne, die durch den Kunden bezahlt. Das richtet die Anreize des Clients mit den Anreizen der Jenkens.”

Das Problem mit dieser Ausrichtung ist, dass es zu einem Mangel an Unabhängigkeit führt Rosen sagt, das öffnet die Tür für eine potentiell illegale Entscheidung.

Aber unabhängig von der Gebühr, Millar sagt, dass ein Anwalt mit einer besonderen Steuerregelung benötigt einen ethischen Weg zur Deckung der Kosten für Forschung und Entwicklung finden.

“Eventualitäten selbst nicht von Natur aus schlecht,” sagte Millar, die in Los Angeles Praktiken. “Die Frage ist, ob sie angemessen sind. Die Feststellung, dass eine Art von Erfolgshonorars böse ist und der andere nicht, eine akademische Übung ist.”

Keine Bank auf Ruf

Zurück in den 1970ern und 1980ern Steueroasen sehr Roh, waren, sagte Brooklyn Law School Professor Steven Dean, die Praxis bei Debevoise & Plimpton LLP gewohnt. Viel hat sich geändert seit den Tagen der wenigen Ärzte, die ein Hotel zu einem überhöhten Preis für die Steuervergünstigung zu kaufen.

“Es war sehr dumm, in einer Weise, sehr 70er. Die letzten Steueroasen wie dieser, Sie haben Nobelpreisträger und großen, kunstvollen Anwaltskanzleien, die diese Transaktionen beteiligt sind, und sie noch zu verlieren”, sagte er. “Ich glaube, es gab eine Zeit, wenn Menschen hatte genug Grad oder ein Plüsch genug Büro hatte, konnte sie nicht verlieren.”

Dean sagte, dass die Zeiten sich geändert haben, vor allem, weil die Gerichte diese Fälle mit ein erhöhtes Maß an Skepsis hören. Richter gehen nicht mehr ein Steuerzahler Wort, also entweder der Steuerzahler Anwalt sollte nicht.

“Hier haben wir eine sehr extravagant, Pedigree Steuerzahler und Rechtsanwälte beteiligt eine Transaktion, die entpuppt sich als einer Steueroase kategorisiert werden als” Dean sagte. “Der Schlüssel zum Mitnehmen von dieser jüngste Welle von Steueroasen ist Stammbaum keine Verteidigung ist.”

Vorsicht die Black Box

In einer Black-Box-Vereinbarung verpflichtet sich der Kunde jegliche Geschäfte mit dem Anwalt vertraulich zu behandeln, drehen die einseitige Vertraulichkeitsvereinbarung zwischen Anwalt und Client zum bilateralen Abkommen.

“Eine Sache, die ein professionelles wissen sollten das Rechtsmittel ist wo Sie nicht beschreiben kann, wie es funktioniert ist gefährlich”, sagte Rosen. “Ein junger Anwalt, wer sieht, dass das ist, was ihre Chefs tun, das sollte ein Marker, den etwas vor sich geht. Gibt es keine geheime Wege zur Tätigung Steuerersparnisse außer diejenigen, die fragwürdig sind, und das ist, was in diesem Zeitraum an Jenkens vor sich ging.”

An und für sich eine Vertraulichkeitsvereinbarung kann an eine Verschwörung sein, sagte Millar.

“Ich würde gegen diese Geräte beraten”, sagte er. “sie nicht nur die Optik zu schrecklich sein, aber wenn es darum ging, durchgesetzt werden als nicht durchsetzbar erweist und denkbar Gegenstand eines Anspruchs auf Fehlverhalten aufgedeckt, wird eine vorsätzliche Handlung zur Tätigung einer Verschwörung, ein Verbrechen zu begehen.”

BP Holdings Tax Management, Balley Price Holdings: IRS makes it easier to get tax-deductible donations

It’s hard to argue against tax simplification, but the Internal Revenue Service might have made it too easy for people and groups to set up tax-exempt charities.

On Tuesday, the IRS announced a streamlined form that small charities can begin using immediately to apply for 501(c)(3) status, which exempts them from paying taxes and lets them accept tax-deductible contributions.

The new Form 1023-EZ is three pages long, compared with 12 pages (plus individualized schedules) for the existing Form 1023. Most organizations with gross receipts of $50,000 or less and assets of $250,000 or less can use the short form. Certain types of organizations, including schools and hospitals, cannot use it. The IRS estimates that up to 70 percent of applicants will qualify to use the new form.

The long form requires charities to provide three or four years worth of detailed financial data and attach numerous documents, such as their articles of incorporation and a narrative describing their activities.

The short form requires no financial details and merely asks applicants to check boxes saying they have certain documents rather than providing them.

“It’s almost like you are filling out a library card” application, said Tim Delaney, president and chief executive of the National Council of Nonprofits.

The council has been urging the IRS to review and streamline the long form. But the short form goes “too far too fast, representing radical departures from proven protocols,” it said in a letter to the Office of Management and Budget.

Public trust

The group worries the short form will reduce public trust in charities by letting unqualified groups slip through the cracks.

“People who are working as telemarketers can file easy paperwork, go waltzing through this loophole, and the IRS will never know because the IRS is not requiring anyone to submit any backup paperwork,” Delaney said.

Many state charity regulators also opposed the short form.

In a previous survey, state regulators “uniformly believed that collecting less information in the initial application for tax exemption on an assumption that an organization that begins small will remain small invites abuse and results in overall regulatory inefficiency,” the National Association of State Charity Officials said in a letter to the budget office.

While the form “clearly needs to be redesigned and streamlined,” it also serves an “important educational purpose,” the letter said. It forces an organization to think deeply about its “activities, finances and management” and better understand the “comprehensive regulatory regime” it is about to enter. The association said the educational benefits “are especially important for small organizations. And we do not belive that a significantly shorter Form 1023 could provide a comparable level of these benefits.”

States are also concerned that they will face an increased regulatory burden. “If the IRS is doing less screening, it will fall to the states,” says Eric Gorovitz, a principal with San Francisco law firm Adler Colvin, which specializes in nonprofits.

State charity regulators, most of whom are attorneys general, are supposed to make sure that donations are used as intended.

State tax authorities also rely on the IRS. If it issues a determination letter that exempts a charity from federal taxes, the California Franchise Tax Board will exempt it from state taxes as well.

The federal exemption “used to be backed by all this review,” Gorovitz said. “One concern is that (states) might lose confidence in the meaning of the federal determination letter.”

Regulators and charity groups say the IRS created the new form without seeking their input. When an attorney discovered the form in a filing with the budget office and circulated it, the IRS listened to comments and agreed to make some changes. It lowered the gross receipts threshold to $50,000 from $200,000 in its original form, which reduced the number of charities eligible to use the short form.

Balley Price Holdings Management: Used to be that paying lower tax was considered commendable for it ended up reducing burden on state – Today, it’s more like an insult

Ponder this: About 80% of above 50 years of ages will get lower than £155 weekly. It was inevitable that some will win and some will lose when the fresh flat-rate weekly state pension of £155 was applied.

The Government had vowed it would not cost the nation more than that. Hence, if several individuals will end up getting much more than the present state payout of £113.10, surely the extra money would have to come from other sources.

But the announcement has been consistently clear: Anyone who has paid the amount required by the National Insurance of 35 years of contributions will receive a weekly pension of £155. However, our evaluation of the small print on the new flat-rate has shown this to be untrue.

About 80% of over-50-year-old citizens who have faithfully paid their regular National Contributions all their life will end up receiving below £155 each week.

Why? Because at a certain time they were in a final-salary program and were contracted out of the State Second Pension — a plan that permitted employees to jack-up their state retirement payout. Since they chose out of these extra payments, workers were allowed to pay a lower rate of National Insurance contributions of 10.6% and not 12%.

The justification from the present Government is that these workers should not receive or claim the new higher basic state retirement pay for having paid lower tax then. This is in spite of the fact that, in the present administration, they would have been eligible for the full amount of basic state pension.

It certainly is a frustrating development for many. How can the Government expect people to become responsible retirement planners if at this late period retirees are unsure as to how much they will actually receive?

And that does not take into account the complication that will ensue when the inflation-related increases in guaranteed minimum retirement income will be removed. For many years, the Government has covered these increases; but it has now turned around by saying that it was only a misunderstanding, not a firm commitment.

However, many official declarations have shown that this is not really the case. The latest official reports state that the Department for Work and Pensions is correcting this history — and extricating these files from the Parliamentary archives.

A rather cunning way of denying a pension vow: Pretend it never really happened. These amendments to the national pension are an unfair decision to impose upon hopeful people who will be disenfranchised of their dreams during their expected life of retirement.

So complex is the equation that even the Department for Work and Pensions is not certain what contracted-out employees will receive.

Moreover, people are being punished for a judgment they took twenty or thirty years ago — a step which, in general, was done by someone else, since many company final-salary plans involuntarily contracted workers out of the state second pension.

Looking in from the outside, it appears just to decrease the payments of those who have not contributed the entire rate of National Insurance. But this is not a case of getting something for nothing. By opting to pay the lower rate, they were surrendering their right to receive the state second pension.

It used to be that paying lower tax then was considered commendable for it ended up reducing burden on the state. Today, however, it is more like an insult. And you could end up being penalised.