In Or Out?

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,194
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
It's not even about what happens in other countries, if the IRS can't even talk about people being in or out of the country without redefining a term to give it a meaning nobody in their right mind would expect it to have it's hard to expect much more clarity anywhere else.

Like I said, USA laws are weird. They are weird about other countries and they are weird about what happens in the USA. They are just weird about pretty much everything that the congress has deliberated upon. It probably all comes down to lobbying and semi-corrupt politics.
 

Stravinsk

Composer and Artist on Flat Earth
Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
4,562
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Deist
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Widow/Widower
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
No
OK, rabbit trails about eagles aside...

Stravinsk picked up a couple of possible gotcha's, but those aren't what I'm thinking of. Assuming the same year and that our mysterious George (no relation to George of this board) didn't set foot in a US embassy while abroad....

The answer is that George is not outside the US. At least that's what the IRS seems to think. If you are out of the country on April 18 you get an automatic two month extension to file your taxes, but "out of the country on April 18" doesn't appear to actually have any bearing on where you happen to be on April 18. The instructions refer to your ordinary residence, thereby redefining what "out of the country" from something that's clear and making it mean something else entirely.

So if you're normally resident in the US then you can be out of the country while being considered to be in the country. If your normal residence is out of the country you are considered out of the country even if you are in the country. Of course the IRS could have simply stated "if you are ordinarily resident outside the US on April 18..." and been clear about it.

Confusing? The fun barely got started...

Ugh

Ugh Ugh Ugh Ugh....

Not your post, mate. Flipping companies and lawyers and Statesman with ideas on who should be taxed and when...can't go into it...just ugh. Theoretically speaking, maybe I was a citizen of France once, or the USA, or Britain....but no one should consider me a candidate for taxation if I LIVE and CONTINUE TO LIVE elsewhere in the world. Double tax me and I'll give up my citizenship in a heartbeat.
 

tango

... and you shall live ...
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
14,695
Location
Realms of chaos
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Ugh

Ugh Ugh Ugh Ugh....

Not your post, mate. Flipping companies and lawyers and Statesman with ideas on who should be taxed and when...can't go into it...just ugh. Theoretically speaking, maybe I was a citizen of France once, or the USA, or Britain....but no one should consider me a candidate for taxation if I LIVE and CONTINUE TO LIVE elsewhere in the world. Double tax me and I'll give up my citizenship in a heartbeat.

But giving up US citizenship will cost you $2,500 last time I saw.

In theory the US has tax treaties with many other countries so you can claim a foreign tax credit against your US tax bill but it means filing more forms and more proof. You can file the foreign earned income exclusion but that effectively lets your foreign earned income push you into a higher tax bracket while then saving you the tax you would have paid in the lowest tax bracket (I can only assume that was changed because someone figured it would raise a few bucks from foreign workers, even relatively low paid workers, who weren't inclined to pay a US tax specialist in their native country to figure out how else they might avoid it)

I really like the idea of taxes being low, simple, and difficult to avoid. If they are low there's less incentive to avoid them, if they are simple you don't end up with situations where the cost of compliance is enormous to the point otherwise honest people are tempted to simply not declare something rather than spend three days reading forms and instructions, and you also avoid tax loss due to people genuinely not understanding that Form 1234, section A, part II, subsection (c)(iii)(5) applies to them because they lost the will to live six sections ago and just wrote 0 in the box. And if they are hard to avoid the advantages are obvious.

For example instead of funding roads from general taxation, perhaps they could be funded from taxation on motor fuels, taxes on servicing etc, and that portion of general taxation eliminated. I'm pulling numbers from the air here but theoretically speaking if the general tax rate dropped a couple of percent and the price of gas went up 20 cents a gallon to replace it (and maybe a 5% tax on motor servicing also created), those who use the roads the most would pay the most and it would be much harder to avoid than merely underdeclaring income or being a little creative with expense accounts.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,194
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
But giving up US citizenship will cost you $2,500 last time I saw.

In theory the US has tax treaties with many other countries so you can claim a foreign tax credit against your US tax bill but it means filing more forms and more proof. You can file the foreign earned income exclusion but that effectively lets your foreign earned income push you into a higher tax bracket while then saving you the tax you would have paid in the lowest tax bracket (I can only assume that was changed because someone figured it would raise a few bucks from foreign workers, even relatively low paid workers, who weren't inclined to pay a US tax specialist in their native country to figure out how else they might avoid it)

I really like the idea of taxes being low, simple, and difficult to avoid. If they are low there's less incentive to avoid them, if they are simple you don't end up with situations where the cost of compliance is enormous to the point otherwise honest people are tempted to simply not declare something rather than spend three days reading forms and instructions, and you also avoid tax loss due to people genuinely not understanding that Form 1234, section A, part II, subsection (c)(iii)(5) applies to them because they lost the will to live six sections ago and just wrote 0 in the box. And if they are hard to avoid the advantages are obvious.

For example instead of funding roads from general taxation, perhaps they could be funded from taxation on motor fuels, taxes on servicing etc, and that portion of general taxation eliminated. I'm pulling numbers from the air here but theoretically speaking if the general tax rate dropped a couple of percent and the price of gas went up 20 cents a gallon to replace it (and maybe a 5% tax on motor servicing also created), those who use the roads the most would pay the most and it would be much harder to avoid than merely underdeclaring income or being a little creative with expense accounts.

Has the naughty USA decided you are IN for tax purposes?
 
Top Bottom