Income Tax Laws...USA?
456645
Dependancy isn't age limited.... Its income limited.  I think that its 3,000 or 6,000 dollars.  If the person that you want to put as a dependant makes under that and you can prove that they lived with you for at least half the year and you provided for them, Then you can claim them regardless of their age.
49164
Yes.  Income is income.  In fact, it might even be Schedule C personal business income which might be taxed at a higher rate.\n\nConsult your accountant or certified tax advisor.\n\nDon't forget to take along that jar of dimes you collected.  You'll need it to pay for the professional advice.
362796
You should consult a tax professional in NZ for the specifics.  I would assume that if you pay all the taxes due in the US, you shouldn't have to pay anything over there.  INCOME tax should be paid where you make the income, which is a business in the states.  NZ shouldn't be able to tough it.
138961
Hi tiff_ige,\nI've lived in several states and have never ran across that law. Good Luck: Blueladybug
491787
WOW, that is a good question for a tax attorney in your area as laws differ from state to state.  Hard to say without knowing if your state is a common property or what state.  usually consultations with an attorney are free the first time.  Wouldn't hurt to give one a call.  :)
844841
The US is one of the few countries which tax citizens on income earned overseas.    Most countries tax income of residents, regardless of citizenship (the US does this too) but do not tax overseas income of their citizens.\n\nHowever...  there are deductions in the US tax code related to overseas income.  So long as you are subject to the taxes of your country of residence, you may qualify to deduct approximately $80,000 from your income for the purposes of determining the US tax owed.  If you earn less than the threshold and live the full tax year overseas, no US tax would be owed.  You are still responsible to file, even if no deductions were made and no tax is owed.
706652
If in the U.S.--- Pay Taxes!\n\n-EA
394652
I have added a link below to the IRS 2005 Tax Rate Schedules page. This will help you identify how much federal tax you'll pay. In addition, you'll find Income Tax Rates for New York and Illinois at links below.\n\nTake care.
771502
I couldn't find a national list.  I wanted to say, no state ALLOWS tax on anything.  They REQUIRE collecting tax on certain items/services.  "Allow" implies an option.
1100341
Personal income tax in the United States is based on the amount of taxable income times a percentage which grows with the amount of income  that is taxable.\n\nThe tax table used to calculate tax starts on page 65 of the following PDF file: <http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i1040.pdf>
185375
Federal taxes are for the most part the same. Around 30% of your taxes go to the federal government. Now what percentage of your income that is taxed depends on your wages. \n\nState taxes vary (obviously) by state. In my state, most food and clothing are not taxed. Well, I'm sure it is but the tax may reflect in the individual price rather the total next to the 'tax' section on my reciept.
184673
Federal Personal Income Tax Code Sections:\nFederal Personal Income Tax Code Outline ... TAXES: Gross Income - non-itemized deductions (§62 and other sections) [above the line deductions]\nhttp://home.pon.net/jmt/law/ThreeL/tax/ava.htm \n\n \nFederal Income Tax Code and Regulations: Selected Sections 2001-2002\nFederal Income Tax Code and Regulations: Selected Sections 2001-2002 Visit Our Book Partner Link: www.yezee.com [Paperback]\nhttp://www.pagenation.com/an/1587780194.html \n\n \nFederal Income Tax Code and Regulations: Selected Sections 2003-2004...\nFederal Income Tax Code and Regulations: Selected Sections 2003-2004 Edition published by CCH Incorporated...\nhttp://allentech.net/bookstore/item_0808009745.html \n\n \nFederal Income Tax Code and Regulation: Selected Sections 1999-2000...\nFederal Income Tax Code and Regulation: Selected Sections 1999-2000 Edition by Martin B. Dickinson and The Great Catastrophe of My Life: Divorce in...\nhttp://207.150.192.12/temp/allindot/reviews2/0808003704.html \n\n \nFederal Income Tax Code and Regulations: Selected Sections 2003-2004...\nBuy Federal Income Tax Code and Regulations: Selected Sections 2003-2004 Edition Books cheap.\nhttp://www.literacyconnections.com/0_0808009745.html \n\n \nFederal Income Tax: Code And Regulations-Selected Sections - \nFederal Income Tax: Code And Regulations-Selected Sections; . Offered by Gutenberg Holdings...\nhttp://www.antiqbook.com/boox/gut/BOOKS117972I.shtml \n\n \nReview Federal Income Tax Code and Regulations: Selected Sections\nFederal Income Tax Code and Regulations: Selected Sections 2001-2002 Reviews at. Computer Toaster...\nhttp://computertoaster.com/reviews/asinsearch_1587780194/ \n\n \nFederal Income Tax Code and Regulation: Selected Sections 1999-2000...\nFederal Income Tax Code and Regulation: Selected Sections 1999-2000 Edition...\nhttp://www.bookhead.co.uk/0808003704.aspx \n\n \nttgapers.com store - Federal Income Tax Code and Regulations:...\nFederal Income Tax Code and Regulations: Selected Sections 2003-2004 Edition...\nhttp://www.ttgapers.com/ttStore-index2-asin-0808009745.html \n\n \nFederal Income Tax Code and Regulations: Selected Sections 2002-2003...\nFederal Income Tax Code and Regulations: Selected Sections 2002-2003 Edition...\nhttp://pdxbooks.com/compare/080800798X
1030171
You need to grab a cup of coffee and start reading...\n\nhttp://evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html#direct\n\n\nDon't believe the first thing you come across.  There's no way hundreds of millions of Americans have been duped for so long, and you've just stumbled across the answer we've all been waiting to hear.  It's noble, but unfounded.  \n\nThere's a lot to consider.  Chew on this (which is from that link above):\n\n[quote]\nThe question of whether an individual income tax was a "direct tax" within the meaning of the Constitution did not arise until the Union enacted an income tax during the Civil War. The Supreme Court followed the opinions from the Hylton decision and ruled unanimously that an income tax was an "excise," and not a "direct tax," and did not need to be apportioned among the states. Springer v. United States, 102 U.S. 586 (1880). \n\nHylton and Springer were limited (or "distinguished") in 1894, when the Supreme Court decided to re-examine the question of whether an income tax was a "direct tax." In the first Pollock decision, a narrow majority of the court (5 of the 9 justices) began with the premise that a tax on the income from property is the same as a tax on the value of the property itself, a premise completely inconsistent with every other Supreme Court decision before or since (and was repudiated by the Supreme Court in New York v. Graves, 300 U.S. 308 (1937)). The Court then concluded that a tax on rents received from real property was a "direct tax" and unconstitutional unless apportioned. Pollock v. Farmers' Loan and Trust Co., 157 U.S. 429 (1894). On rehearing, the same five justices decided that a tax on dividends, interest, and other income from personal property (property other than land) was also a "direct tax" and so unconstitutional unless apportioned. Pollock v. Farmers Bank and Trust Co., 158 U.S. 601 (1895) \n\nThe Pollock court was very clear that it was only a tax on the incomes from property that was a "direct tax," and other forms of income could be taxed without apportionment. This was confirmed by the court in Brushaber v. Union Pacific R.R. Co., 240 U.S. 1 (1916). (See below for a more detailed discussion of the taxation of the income from labor.) \n\nAfter the Pollock decisions, and before the ratification of the 16th Amendment, the Supreme Court also held that a corporate income tax was constitutional if it was based on the income from the manufacture and sale of goods, even though real and personal property were used to manufacture the goods. Flint v. Stone Tracy Co., 220 U.S. 107 (1911) \n\nBecause of the Pollock decisions, Congress was limited in its ability to impose a tax on incomes, because it was necessary to determine the source of the income. Wages, salaries, and other earned incomes could be taxed, and income from manufacturing and other business activities could be taxed, but rents, interest, dividends, and other incomes from property could not be taxed without apportionment (a very awkward process). The 16th Amendment was therefore proposed by Congress, and ratified by the states, so that Congress could tax incomes "from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration." \n[/quote]
271412
There's a list of locations on the state's tax website:\nhttp://www.state.hi.us/tax/a1_3tax_address.htm
223478
If you were a part year resident in a state where you earned no income, but did earn income during that tax year, you'd want to check the resident filing requirements for that state to see if any of your income is taxable even though you earned no income in that state.  \n\nAs a similar example, I live in State A and but only earn income in State B.  Because I'm a resident of State A, I pay income tax there (and in State B) even though my income is earned entirely in state B for the entire year.
114009
The short answer is no.\n\nTry Taxact.com.  It is free for everyone, regardless of income.
106415
Depends on what type of taxes you're talking about.  Several states have no income tax, but have other types of taxes.\n\nHere's an article on CNN's site that talks about it, and has two links to useful lists.\n\nhttp://money.cnn.com/2005/04/08/real_estate/tax_friendly/index.htm