Company Accounting Software.

All types of business accounting software produce a net taxable profit being the difference between sales income received and purchase expenses. The company accounts package often does not include capital and tax allowances on fixed assets which are essential elements to enable final tax accounting which the production of the tax liability.

Since tax allowances change then not all accounting packages cope well with this aspect as either it is ignored and any claims for capital allowances need to be input manually which often requires knowledge of the tax system. In any event many systems require the current year tax allowances to be input.

Tax accounting packages do exist where the current tax rates and rules issued by the taxation authority for a specific financial tax year. Such tax accounting software either has to include an upgrade service to incorporate the different tax rules that apply each year or a new package has to be purchased for each new financial year.

Every quality tax accounting software package should calculate the corporation tax liability which is one of the most significant costs of every business. If the accounting software does not produce an automated calculation of the tax liability then the tax due has to be entered manually usually by journal entry.

Manually entering the tax liability is a function frequently best dealt with by an accountant since the transaction also involves the final completion of the company accounts and potentially journal entries to account for distributions from the after tax profit and retained profits.

Vat Tax Return Software.

It would be unusual to find a company accounts package that did not automatically generate the quarterly figures for the vat return since almost all companies are vat registered.

The vast majority of companies have a sales turnover which exceeds the vat threshold limit at which vat registration is obligatory; most companies sales turnover exceeds this threshold at which point vat registration is mandatory.

The accounting software must be capable of satisfying the requirements of the taxation authority which in regard to a vat return includes the provision of an accounting audit trail of financial transactions.

Tax Software and CT600 Corporation Tax Return.

In the UK a private limited company has to complete a corporation tax return each financial year. Known as the CT600 companies with a sales turnover which qualifies as a small company can complete the CT600 short return.

Completing even the short version of the CT600 tax return is a specialist accountancy area which few non accountants are familiar with or find easy to deal with since it demands intimate knowledge of the tax system. Completing the corporation tax return can be a daunting task for a non accountant including several hours study of the accompanying notes. It is no simple task for many accountants who do not specialise as a tax accountant.

Most accounts packages do not include tax software encrypted within the packages to produce the corporation tax return but may include an online feed to assist in the submission of ther company tax return.

Using the right tax software the CT600 corporation tax return can be completed automatically.

To do so the company accounts package has to include all the relevant tax rules and rates applicable for fixed assets and the calculation of the tax liability. Both tax rates and the rules in which tax is collected are frequently changed. It is in fact unusual if the tax rules are not changed in some part every single year. Suitable tax software is essential to perform this annual process.

The tax accounting takes the tax rates and rules automating the work of a tax accountant to produce the tax liability. The term tax software indicates automation based upon data input which the computer package then processes to produce the desired output. Company tax software produces the tax requirements of the company including both the corporation tax liability and completion of the tax return.

This article is based on the assumptions that 1) You are a small business owner or self-employed person (including home-based and part-time business owners) and 2) You don’t like to pay taxes. In fact, whenever you think about paying taxes, you get so mad you end up all worked up with nowhere to go.

Now, if paying taxes makes you so upset, what have you done about it lately? Why was your tax bill so high last year?

You paid too much tax last year (and the year before that, and the year before that . . .) because you have probably been an innocent victim of many popular myths about taxes.

Here they are. Get rid of them or you’ll be stuck paying too much tax forever.

Tax Myth #1: “I don’t make enough money to worry about reducing my taxes.”

Nothing could be further from the truth. People at all levels of income can pay less tax.

Tax reduction strategies are not just for the rich and famous. No matter how much money you make, you can pay less tax than you currently pay.

In fact, if your business has a loss, you can use that loss to offset other sources of income, such as wages from a regular job, your spouse’s wages, investment income, rental income, and other business income.

And if your business loss is so great that it more than offsets all your other income, you can take advantage of a special rule that lets you: a) Carry back that excess loss to the two prior years, thereby entitling you to a refund of taxes you already paid for either (or both) of those two prior years; and/or b) Carry forward that excess loss to the next 20 future years, so that any income you earn in the future will be reduced by that excess loss.

Tax Myth #2: “Tax reduction strategies are too complicated for me to use.”

Again, hogwash. There are plenty of ways for you, the average American, to lower your taxes.

Tax reduction is not just for the wealthy who pay high-priced attorneys to finagle their way out of paying taxes with sophisticated tax-avoidance schemes, like off-shore trusts and foreign bank accounts.

The average small business owner has plenty of tax reduction strategies at his/her disposal. You just have to know what they are and how to use them.

Tax Myth #3: “I had my return prepared by an accountant, so I know I paid the right amount of taxes.”

There are thousands of excellent, hard-working accountants doing a great job. And if you use a tax professional, maybe he/she has done everything possible to reduce your taxes to the legal minimum.

Based on my own experience, however, I’m convinced that many taxpayers who use professional tax preparers are overpaying their taxes, sometimes by thousands of dollars each year.

Why is that? Well, there are many reasons. The most obvious one is this: Many professional tax preparers are just that: tax preparers and tax preparers only.

A good tax accountant may know how to prepare a tax return in his/her sleep. He knows the forms backwards and forwards. He knows what numbers go on which form perfectly.

But that’s it. That’s all he/she knows.

A good tax preparer is not necessarily knowledgeable in tax reduction strategies. There’s a big difference between a good tax preparer and a savvy tax reduction specialist.

When you look for a good accountant, make sure you find one who doesn’t just “do the returns”, send out a bill and say “Next, please.”

Tax Myth #4: “My tax situation is OK because my BLANK (fill in the blank with a family member or other good friend) takes care of my taxes.”

There are various versions of this myth. Do any of these sound familiar?

“My brother-in-law takes care of my taxes.” “My uncle takes care of my taxes.” “My college buddy takes care of my taxes.”

And of course, the same problem exists with Myth #4 as Myth #3. Even when someone you know and trust does your returns, how do you know that this person is a good tax reduction specialist?

And often, many of these family members or “buddies” are not even professional tax preparers. This person just happens to be “The Family Accountant.” Just like every family has one person who knows a lot about cars (or mutual funds, or carpet cleaning, or whatever), many families have someone who “knows enough to be dangerous” with regard to taxes.

And even if your “Family Accountant” is a professional tax preparer, he’s probably not charging you for the return. He’s doing you a favor. He prepares your return; you change his oil.

My first reaction to this kind of situation (when someone is getting his/her return prepared for free) is this: You get what you pay for. When a family member does your return for free, how much attention can he give to your need for tax reduction strategies? Probably very little.

Tax Myth #5: “My tax situation is OK because I prepare my own returns.”

If this statement applies to you, then perhaps you are a “do-it-yourself-er”. Money is tight and you are used to doing things yourself anyway, so why not save a few bucks each year and do your own returns?

So you’ve spend countless hours over the years pouring over the forms and instructions, trying to figure out how to do the returns. And you’ve done OK. No letters from the IRS, no audits. Hey, pat yourself on the back!

And now that tax preparation software is so readily available and affordable, doing your own return is a breeze. Just key in a few numbers here and there, push the print button, and presto, you’ve got your return done in record time. And now you can even e-file your return with your own computer.

Have you ever heard of the book, “The Millionaire Next Door” (by Thomas J. Stanley and William D. Danko)?

This book describes the common characteristics of millionaires in our country. My favorite millionaire characteristic is this:

Millionaires become millionaires by minimizing their taxes and getting their tax & other financial affairs in order.

Now comes the Million Dollar Question: How do you think millionaires get their tax affairs in order? By doing their own tax returns? Of course not. Millionaires don’t prepare their own tax returns. They have more productive things to do with their time.

Instead, what millionaires do is spend time and money each year on tax planning and tax reduction strategies, not figuring out what number goes on which line of Form XYZ.

So my challenge to you is this: What are you going to do this year to reduce your taxable income?

Are you a believer in any of these myths? Now’s the time to get rid of them, once and for all. Your financial well-being depends on it.

Following an historic election, we take a moment to examine just what an Obama presidency will mean to the United States – what we have to look forward to, and how he will deal with our current financial crisis. And according Jim Davidson, some of the numbers just don’t add up.

One of Obama’s prime campaign planks has been his promise to mercilessly raise taxes on the “rich,” a group initially defined as those making more than $250,000 per year. This was later dropped to $200,000 per year, and more recently has been defined as those Americans making more than $150,000 annually.

Setting aside the precipitous downward slide in the definition of “rich,” there is ample reason to suspect that Obama’s tax changes portend much higher, if not confiscatory, taxes on the most productive Americans. Obama has strongly argued for higher taxes as a way of employing government to alter the pre-tax distribution of income, which he believes has concentrated too much of the gains from productivity in recent years in the hands of the very rich.

He seems to think that the ‘very rich’ are a closed caste of more or less fixed membership, which changes little from year-to-year. This figures in his concept of ‘fairness,’ which supposes that it is perfectly just to burden a small fraction of the population with a majority of the costs of running the Federal government. This was detailed in a New York Times article on “spreading the wealth” by David Leonhardt. He wrote of Obama:

“He would then pay for the cuts, at least in part, by raising taxes on the affluent to a point where they would eventually be slightly higher than they were under Clinton. For these upper-income families, the Tax Policy Center’s comparisons with McCain are even starker. McCain, by continuing the basic thrust of Bush’s tax policies and adding a few new wrinkles, would cut taxes for the top 0.1 percent of earners – those making an average of $9.1 million – by another $190,000 a year, on top of the Bush reductions. Obama would raise taxes on this top 0.1 percent by an average of $800,000 a year. ‘It’s hard not to look at that figure and be a little stunned. It would represent a huge tax increase on the wealthy families. But it’s also worth putting the number in some context. The bulk of Obama’s tax increases on the wealthy – about $500,000 of that $800,000 – would simply take away Bush’s tax cuts. The remaining $300,000 wouldn’t nearly reverse their pretax income gains in recent years. Since the mid-1990s, their inflation-adjusted pretax income has roughly doubled.’

“To put it another way, the wealthy have done so well over the past few decades, with their incomes soaring and tax rates plummeting, that Obama’s plan would not come close to erasing their gains. The same would be true of households making a few hundred thousand dollars a year (who have gotten smaller raises than the very rich but would also face smaller tax increases). As ambitious as Obama’s proposals might be, they would still leave the gap between the rich and everyone else far wider than it burdensome on the young entrepreneur who was making his first millions as it would on the aging plutocrat who actually had enjoyed the prosperity of the past-quarter century since Reagan cut marginal tax rates.”

An October 13 editorial in The Wall Street Journal clarifies the mysterious arithmetic of Obama’s sweeping claims to cut income taxes for millions who currently have no income tax liability and pay no taxes:

‘For the Obama Democrats, a tax cut is no longer letting you keep more of what you earn. In their lexicon, a tax cut includes tens of billions of dollars in government handouts that are disguised by the phrase ‘tax credit.’ Mr. Obama is proposing to create or expand no fewer than seven such credits for individuals:

“- A $500 tax credit ($1,000 a couple) to ‘make work pay’ that phases out at income of $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 per couple.

“- A $4,000 tax credit for college tuition.

“- A 10% mortgage interest tax credit (on top of the existing mortgage interest deduction and other housing subsidies).

“- A ’savings’ tax credit of 50% up to $1,000.

“- An expansion of the earned-income tax credit that would allow single workers to receive as much as $555 a year, up from $175 now, and give these workers up to $1,110 if they are paying child support.

“- A child care credit of 50% up to $6,000 of expenses a year.

“- A ‘clean car’ tax credit of up to $7,000 on the purchase of certain vehicles.

“Here’s the political catch. All but the clean car credit would be ‘refundable,’ which is Washington-speak for the fact that you can receive these checks even if you have no income-tax liability. In other words, they are an income transfer – a federal check – from taxpayers to nontaxpayers. Once upon a time we called this ‘welfare,’ or in George McGovern’s 1972 campaign a ‘Demogrant.’ Mr. Obama’s genius is to call it a tax cut.

“The Tax Foundation estimates that under the Obama plan 63 million Americans, or 44% of all tax filers, would have no income tax liability and most of those would get a check from the IRS each year. The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis estimates that by 2011, under the Obama plan, an additional 10 million filers would pay zero taxes while cashing checks from the IRS.

“The total annual expenditures on refundable ‘tax credits’ would rise over the next 10 years by $647 billion to $1.054 trillion, according to the Tax Policy Center. This means that the tax-credit welfare state would soon cost four times actual cash welfare. By redefining such income payments as ‘tax credits,’ the Obama campaign also redefines them away as a tax share of GDP. Presto, the federal tax burden looks much smaller than it really is.”

After all the sloppy definitions are parsed, one point remains clear. The top 5% of U.S. income earners, who presently pay 60.14% (2006 figures) of all income tax, are destined for a huge federal tax increase under Obama.

One of Obama’s specific proposals is to raise the capital gains and dividend taxes to 25%, which will sharply increase capital confiscation as increasing percentages of “gains” will reflect inflationary depreciation of the currency. In the U.S., an investor must pay tax on the difference between the sales price of an asset and it purchase price, with no adjustment for inflation. Consequently, when the tax rate and inflation are high, a large portion of the “capital gain” is illusory. Any asset that appreciates by less than the rate of inflation will result in its owner losing purchasing power and having to pay taxes on the illusory gains. At Obama’s higher tax rates, (he has suggested that capital gains and dividend taxes should be hiked to as much as 25%,) capital confiscation would result from modest levels of inflation.

And the Great Credit Crunch implies that inflation will be far higher than in recent experience.

Setting aside whether it is moral or equitable to force a small fraction of the population to essentially pay for the whole cost of government, much of which entails the shuffling of checks to purchase votes of various aggrieved groups, there is a bigger question. Can it be wise for the whole fiscal regime to stand on the shoulders of a small group, like a pyramid tottering on its point, so that any tribulation which undermines the prosperity of those who pay would promise to bankrupt the state?

It is a worthwhile question to ask if you have considerable assets. In light of the worldwide credit crunch, which has deflated assets of all kinds, the prospect of burgeoning prosperity at the magnitude required to enable one-in-20 Americans to become “Super Rich” benefactors of Big Government is vanishingly small. There won’t be enough rich people to fill the role assigned to them in Obama’s scheme. The result to be expected, in addition to confiscatory taxation, is a dramatic shortfall of revenues. This, in turn, implies surging deficits and deficit financing requirements that will rapidly swamp the capacity of the Treasury to borrow.

Source: The Danger Lurking Behind Obama’s Tax Policy

Estate tax is a Federal tax levied on a decedent’s distribution of possessions to heirs identified by state law or will. Yet, the percentage of estates which are subject to the tax is very minuscule. The IRS reported that just over 2 percent of people who died in 2001 were subject to the estate tax.

When inaugurated, one of President Bush’s concerns was to phase out the estate tax, which resulted in the 2001 bill, reducing estate taxes. The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 generated a $1.35 trillion tax cut for the wealthy. By 2009, estates exceeding $3.5 million will be taxed phase out completely by 2010. For this reason, some have called the 2001 tax cut the “Paris Hilton Benefit Act.” Yet, Congress’s 2011 decision, whether to continue taxing estates, has become a heated topic in Washington. By analyzing the pros and cons behind repealing the estate tax, as well as a short insight into the gift tax, a better understanding of favoring or neglecting estate tax may be established and clearly evaluated.

Abolishing the estate tax decreases government revenues over ten years by $745 billion after 2011. Over these 10 years, the government will also lose $225 billion of interest from these funds; the total loss to the government is estimated to be $1 trillion. This deficit is catastrophic because it affects not only federal debt, but the funding of services for U.S taxpayers. Thus, tax cuts for multimillion dollar estates places further financial stress on healthcare, education, local homeland security, and Social Security. Another incentive to act in opposition of the repeal involves charities and foundations; such foundations include universities, museums, and churches which benefit from donations and inheritances. This being said, many high-income individuals bypass the estate tax by donating a great deal to charitable groups and nonprofit organizations. Repealing the estate tax would reduce this drive. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the repeal of the estate tax would decrease charitable bequests by 16 to 28 percent.

Small businesses and family owned farms applaud the termination of the tax in order to be tax free when passing down the business to next generations. Another change hurting small businesses is that as the estate tax is phased out, the step-up in basis will disappear as well. The step-up basis is the readjustment, upon inheritance, of the value of an appreciated asset for tax purposes. This change in step-up basis can negatively affect small business owners and farmers because a considerable amount of their wealth is in business asset form.

While discussing matters of the estate tax, it is also important to recognize the estate tax’s brother, the gift tax. The purpose of the gift tax is simple: if gifts were made throughout the entirety of one’s life, it would be possible to escape the estate tax completely. Gift and estate taxes coincide because gift transfers can greatly impact estate taxes. An example of gift taxes influencing estate taxes involves unified transfer tax credits. This tax credit establishes the amount of wealth which can be transferred between parties without incurring tax consequences. The two types of credits include the first which is available for taxable gifts and the second is available for transfers by death. For Federal income tax purposes, the unified tax credit can be exhausted only once (excluding exceptions). This being said, if the unified tax credit is used for gift purposes, it ceases to exist for estate tax purposes and vice versa.

If the estate tax is repealed taxpayers would more than likely see a change in the tax system. For example, Canada repealed its estate tax system in 1971. Today, a Canadian resident is considered to have immediately disposed of his or her assets prior to death. Thus, estates are subject to triggering capital gains tax on such assets at death under Canadian income tax. Compared to the United States, Canada has a significant increase in its capital gains tax, totaling 38.5% tax rate. The reason for such a high capital gains tax rate could be because of the termination of the estate tax. As a result, the United States might see similar capital gains tax consequences if the estate tax is repealed.

Today the estate tax has formed into a moral argument because it moderates the expanding gap between the wealthy and the poor. Revenues from the tax would help present more opportunity for those not inheriting riches. Some politicians want to keep the tax in order to force the rich to pay, while others would like to repeal it to save certain groups (farmers, small businesses owners, etc.) from its hardships. If Congress does not take action on the estate tax in 2010, the tax is kept relevant on January 1, 2011 with $1million exemption and a 55 percent tax rate. However, economic and political conditions will dictate the projections of the estate tax come 2011. Regardless of the debate among politicians, if the estate tax is repealed, another tax will most likely take its place. These pros and cons illustrate the difficultness for the United States government to repeal or sustain the estate tax for the year 2011.

In this presidential election year the arguments for a tax system that is fair have reemerged.  The term fair is subjective and although there is no agreement on which tax structure would be the fairest, most would agree that it should be transparent, efficient, and simple.    One dimension of fairness that addresses these criteria is the complexity of tax laws.  Two hundred years ago James Madison, the fourth president of the U. S. reiterated this complexity conundrum:

“… if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood…or undergo such incessant changes that no man who knows what the law is today can guess what it will be tomorrow.”

Studies have shown that reducing complexity–for filing, paying, and reporting–will increase compliance rates resulting in increased government revenues.  We want to maximize compliance rates without increasing the burden to comply and decrease tax evasion without adding to the administration costs.  In trying to improve tax fairness by satisfying economic, distributional or other policy goals, the political process adds complexity by adding exemptions and reduced tax rates.  The assumption is that to offset this loss in revenue statutory rates are increased and taxpayers that do comply bear the burden of paying a greater percentage of taxes and this affects fairness.   

The complexity of the current U. S. tax system is enormous.  In 1995 the federal tax laws had 40,500 pages and in 2006, total pages were 66,498.  It has over one hundred special tax provisions, phase-in and phase-out rules, and a parallel tax system–alternative minimum tax.  Businesses may pay up to five different types of taxes: profit, social, property, turnover, and other taxes for example municipal fees and fuel taxes.  This complexity adds a cost burden to compliance and according to IRS estimates, compliance costs are $140 billion per year.   Governments are reluctant to reduce business tax burdens because they fear decreased revenues but results from studies conducted by the World Bank indicate that countries that reformed their system increased investment and economic growth which increased their tax revenues.

Complexity and non-compliance contribute to the tax gap, the difference between taxes that are owed and what is actually paid.   Illegal tax evasion by the cash sector, Schedule C filers has the lowest compliance rates.  The estimated tax gap for 2001 is $345 billion and as of 2006 $55 billion of this was recovered.  The Internal Revenue Service estimates that underreporting is about 50% for this sector and the annual underground economy is estimated to be between one to three trillion dollars.  Tax avoidance, cheating, has become pervasive.

Complex tax systems in trying to address fairness have imposed different tax treatment on people with the same income and can lead to multiple interpretations of the same tax laws and this creates the opportunities for tax avoidance, non-compliance.  Compliance rates between the non-cash and cash sector create disproportionate payments of taxes.  Empirical studies support the theory that compliance decreases when people believe that others are evading taxes.  In 2008, congressional investigators found that over a ten year period, payments of federal payroll taxes withheld were short by $58 billion.  Over the past ten years payroll taxes that were withheld but not submitted doubled.    

There is growing political support to simplify the tax codes and reduce non-compliance.    It would appear that the simplest tax system would be a flat tax but no country has been successful at administering a flat tax.  Economists in Estonia, a former communist state in Eastern Europe who had implemented flat taxes, are promoting a change to a progressive system of taxation because of the social disparities caused by the flat tax.  Some other countries claiming to have a flat tax, such as Hong Kong in reality have a steeply progressive tax system.

 Another suggestion is to adopt a value added tax, (VAT).  Value added tax is one consumption tax that has been studied by the Government Accountability Office.  After studying five countries that were chosen for their range and complexity of VAT systems– Australia, Canada, France, New Zealand and the United Kingdom– they concluded that VATs required significant resources in order to maintain compliance even in simple systems.  Administering a VAT system would not reduce complexity and compliance risks because both the U. S. system and VATs use tax preferences and exemptions to further complicate the tax laws.  VATs may be easier to enforce but both systems can be manipulated, face compliance and burden challenges, and are subject to evasion.   

The conclusion based on studies and analysts demonstrates that making the tax system simpler, with fewer special provisions, does increase compliance rates and reduces the tax burden.  Broadening the tax base can mitigate the affects of high tax rates and increase government revenues.  Technically we could create a fairer tax system by reducing tax complexity and non-compliance and make it fair, transparent, efficient, and simple.  Making these changes appears to be difficult due to conflict with political goals and the propensity to avoid taxes.  Implementing a system that meets these criteria requires political and taxpayer commitment.

General Tax Rates for Select Countries*  

General Sales Tax

Country

Corporate
Taxes

Individual
Taxes

Payroll
Taxes

Value Added
Tax (VAT)

General Service
Tax (GST)

Sales
Tax

United States

Federal

15-39%

0-35%

15.30%

-

-

-

State

0-12%

0-10.3%

-

-

-

0-10.25%

Australia

30%

0-45%

-

-

10%

-

Canada

Federal

29.5-35.5%

15-29%

-

-

5%

-

Provincial

-

4-17.95%

-

-

-

0-10%

Estonia

22%

22%

33.90%

18%

-

-

France

33.30%

10-50%

45%

19.6%
(5.5% on food)

-

-

Hong Kong

16.50%

0-15%

 -

-

 -

-

New Zealand

30%

0-39%

- 

-

12.50%

-

United Kingdom

21-28%

0,20,40%

23.80%

17.50%

-

-

* Does not compare social benefits received.

.

Every so often we read that governments are going to crack down on tax havens and offshore bank accounts. The latest threats to do this have come in the wake of the financial crisis and economic recession that began in 2008.

However, attacking offshore tax havens is not new. And it would appear that such attacks by various politicians rarely amount to more than window dressing to placate the masses and an attempt to divert blame for any economic woes from themselves.

Before answering the second question posed in the title of this article, it would be a good idea to clarify exactly what a tax haven is.

A tax haven is a country which has little or no income tax. Some tax havens have zero income taxes, while others may have very low taxes – or only tax local income not worldwide income.

To give a few examples: If you live in Hong Kong you will be taxed at a flat rate of 17% on your income. On the other hand, if you live in New Zealand you will be taxed on a sliding scale all the way up to 38%. Obviously if you lived and worked in Hong Kong, then you?d be keeping a lot more of your own money.

Another issue is whether a country taxes domestic income only or worldwide income. Most countries tax worldwide income, which means if you live in the USA but earn income in the UK, then the UK income is also taxable and is to be considered part of your total income for tax purposes.

But if you lived in Singapore and made money outside that country, then you wouldn?t be liable for income tax on the overseas income, only your local income. So while Singapore is not considered a tax haven in the usual way, it is in fact a tax haven for those who live there and earn money outside Singapore.

The attraction of tax havens is obvious. If you live there, or do business there, you could end up keeping a lot more of your own money. For it never pays to forget that income tax is a tax on your very life. Your labour is part of your life. If someone were to claim 80% of your labour without pay, and only give you food and shelter in return, then you?d have a good working definition of slavery. And the rates of tax prevalent today are akin to slavery in every way – with most developed countries raking off 50% or more of their resident?s money with income and other forms of tax.

So a tax haven is exactly that – a safe haven, if you will, from predatory taxes.

Trouble is, high-taxing countries hate this. They don?t like having to compete with other countries in the matter of tax. And if truth be told, most governments of the developed world would very much like it if such tax competition was abolished, by getting rid of tax havens.

But it?s not as simple as it appears. The tax code of any particular country is a matter for that country to decide. If Hong Kong levies an income tax of 17% on its residents and New Zealand levies up to 38% – who?s to say that Hong Kong shouldn?t be allowed to do it?

And that?s the problem. The very notion of abolishing tax havens implies abolishing each country?s sovereignty. It means that someone, somewhere, is going to dictate to every country what its income tax rate will be – and that in order to eliminate tax competition the rates for all countries must be the same.

Of course, this will not happen – not without a one world government and a one world tax system.

The truth is tax competition, like any competition, is healthy. The very existence of low tax or no tax jurisdictions keeps other countries on their toes, and draws a line in the sand as to how high they can push their own tax rates – without causing an exodus of their best and most productive people.

But there are other reasons why tax havens and offshore bank accounts will not be abolished any time soon. Human nature. And in particular the nature of many politicians. You see, if there were no tax havens, no places to ?hide? money – then what would the corrupt politicians of this world do with their ill-gotten gains?

No, the powers that be, at the very top echelons, require places where they can stash their cash. All their threats about abolishing or doing away with tax havens are but hot air – and hypocritical to boot. Because at the end of the day the people who benefit most from the existence of different tax rates around the world are the people with money – the same people who pull all the strings. To abolish tax havens would be akin to cutting their own throats.

So don?t expect tax havens and offshore banking to disappear any time soon!

Tax payment is probably the most confusing process in the world. Many people have many questions regarding the process of tax payment. They have a little or no knowledge about the laws of tax payment and so can not pay tax in a timely manner. The solution to this problem is the tax accountant. The tax accountant is a consultant who can complete the whole process of tax payment for you. If you are worrying about the tax payment, your worries ends now. You can hire a better tax accountant who will solve all of your problems regarding the tax payment.

The job of a tax consultant is to manage the tax payments, planning for the tax, and to assist you in the preparation of your tax payment. If you are looking for a good tax    accountant, this article will help you finding a good tax account. This article collects various points that a tax accountant should possess.

Specialization:
The specialization in one or more areas of tax is important requirement of the tax accountant. There are many tax accounting consultants who provide specialized services. They are master of individual areas of tax. The areas of tax such as financial tax, individual tax, etc.

Knowledgeable:
The tax field is too large. There are few persons who have a great knowledge about the tax. The knowledge about tax is a most important characteristic that a tax accountant should possess. If you are looking for a good tax accountant, the knowledge about the taxation should be the first requirement of you.
 
Experienced:
Experience makes man perfect. When considering someone to process the tax payment, you must see the experience of the person. The experienced person would be easily able to process the tax payment. The tax accountant must possess at least three or four years of experience.
Popular:
The tax payer comes to the tax accountant by the reference of someone. It is obvious that a popular tax account will get more clients. So whenever you are about to hire a tax accountant, you should look for a well experienced person.

Comfortable:
The tax accountant should be comfortable to the tax payers. He should understand the requirements of the client and according to the requirement, the tax payment preparation and planning should be proceed.

Affordable:
The fee of the tax accountant is a major point of consideration when any tax payer would receive services from a tax accountant. The payment to the tax accountant should be according to the services and the amount of tax to be paid. 

Situation Special:
The tax payers have many situations, each of which is different then another. The tax accountant that can handle any situation and can solve the tax problem for any situation can be known as the idle tax accountant.

All the characteristics described here may not be found in one person. Some times, a person with knowledge may not be so popular and vice versa. You need to be careful when you choose a tax account for you.

The savings of tax is the dream that everyone wants to achieve. Almost each country in the world has the income tax system. Many taxation professionals are there who are providing tax related services to the millions of tax payers. The savings of tax is the topic of discussion since a long time. This article will explore the tricks to save the tax. In this article, you will find simple tricks that can be useful to you in the process of the tax payment. The tax saving is in your hand. If you wish, you can easily save tax. Yes, you can save your valuable money to be paid to the government in a form of tax. There are mainly there methods of tax savings: Reducing Income, increasing tax deduction, and being qualified for the tax credits. If you can all of the three, you can easily save the tax money

Reducing income
The tax is applied on the income and deducted amount of tax is dependent on the amount of the income. If your income is more, you have to pay more tax to the government. The low income can result in low tax deduction. There are several ways to save tax. If you runs a small business, you can wait till the new year if you are about to stock more items. If you are an employee in a company, the government itself gives less income tax offers to you. The offers depend upon the type of your job.

Increasing tax deductions:
If you pay taxes in advance, the deduction of the amount of taxes can be increased. The payment of taxes in advance can save a good amount of tax. The real estate taxes and other fix taxes can be easily paid in advance. The increase in the tax deduction can be a great way of saving of tax. There are many people who pay taxes in advance and enjoy the tax credits from the government.

Getting the tax credits:
The tax credits are given to the regular and timely tax payers. Various governments have various schemes on the credits given to the tax payers. You can get tax benefits according to the laws of your government. The advance payment of the fix taxes such as house tax can be a useful trick to earn tax credits from the government.
 
The process of tax payment is probably the most complicated process on the earth. If you have right guidelines, you can easily save tax and make more money. The tax savings tips given here may not be applied to everyone. The tips are useful for you to reduce your taxes. There are many people who don’t know about the real ways to reduce the income tax. This article may have helped them a lot.

The income tax is probably difficult to understand. It is most quoted by the people on the Income Tax. The Income Tax process has so many things to do and ofcource, very difficult to understand. It requires almost 1 year to fully understanding the whole Income Tax structure for any students. There are many Income Tax preparation courses are available for the students. The preparation for the income tax returns would be so difficult than applying for the income tax preparation courses. The Income Tax has been the puzzle for everyone since it came into existence. To understand Income Tax is the most difficult thing to do.
The important reason for the difficulty of understanding of Income Tax is that countries have their own taxation rules. The taxation rules in India would be totally different than the taxation rules in USA. Income tax preparation courses would be divided into sections. Students can easily understand the whole structure of Income tax due to this section method. Once you are prepared for the Income Tax, you can be a Tax Consultant. The persons, who have a great Tax knowledge, can get a good job in the current market and can earn good money. They can also start their own tax consultancy.
The training of the income tax is the first steps to a better job. There are many tax study institutes that provide good education in the field of income tax. The national accreditation is provided by most of the tax training institutes. The institutes may be near to your home or office and you can easily join for the training. If you join the institute near to you, you can save money, energy and time that you will waste in traveling.
The beginners in the tax field, as well as the advanced students can join the tax education institute for better knowledge of income tax. The start to end knowledge of income tax is provided for the beginners and for the advanced students, advanced knowledge of tax is provided by the tax education institutes. The institutes provide a deep knowledge of tax from the easy to the complex tax.
Some of the topics that tax courses includes are: Depreciation, Exemptions and filing statuses, Itemizing deductions, Computing taxes and methods of doing so, Business and non-business related deductions, Capital gains and loss taxes, Depletion, Payroll taxes, Gross income and Estimated taxes.
The limit of the place is now not effective on the tax institutes. The tax institutes have almost reached all the corner of the country. The tax institutes also provide the job training in tax preparation and cover most topics on the tax.
 If you want to get your career to be growing fast and make money, getting admission into a tax education institute and being trained from it is a good idea for you. The training in the tax education will help you a lot in your future career of being a tax consultant.

The April 15 tax deadline has come and gone. For the millions of taxpayers who failed to file legally required tax returns, tax help is available for those who act now! Even taxpayers who received an extension for filing are not granted more time for the payment of taxes owed and may need income tax relief.

The act of not filing your tax returns can lead to more significant financial problems in the long run. Not to mention, failure to file tax returns may be construed as a criminal act by the IRS, punishable by one year in jail and $10,000 for each year not filed. Needless to say, it’s one thing to owe the IRS money, but another thing to potentially lose your freedom for failure to file a tax return.

 The longer you put off dealing with overdue taxes, the more serious your IRS problems will be. So I recommend filing any tax returns that are due as soon as possible to avoid additional interest, penalties and potential IRS collection tactics, such as a levy on your bank account.

 With the federal budget deficit for the current year expected to top $1.8 trillion, Americans can expect more tax audits and increased IRS actions. So anyone who owes back taxes will want to avoid becoming targets of aggressive IRS collection efforts that can financially cripple them for life.

 Here are 5 reasons to file your delinquent tax returns:

 1) You can go to jail for not filing your taxes

Even if you haven’t filed your tax return for one year – it is still considered delinquent and could be construed by the IRS as a criminal offense. Actor Wesley Snipes didn’t report more than $10 million to the IRS and he was convicted of three misdemeanor counts of failing to file a tax return. Richard Hatch, who won the first season of CBS’s hit show Survivor, is in prison for failing to report $1 million in prize money.

The IRS goes after those U.S. taxpayers who try to avoid taxes, and Average Joes as are just as likely as high-profile individuals to be targets of the tax-collecting agency. At every level, the agency has become increasingly aggressive in pursuing tax cheats. Are you willing to lose your freedom because you failed to file your tax returns?

2) You can incur a 25% penalty for not filing your tax returns

In this economic downturn, Americans may opt to not file because they don’t have the funds to pay the taxes owed. The best thing for taxpayers in difficult financial situations to do is file their tax return, pay what they can and work with the IRS to establish a payment plan that will keep them compliant.

Additionally, if there are any delinquent tax returns that are due, they should consider filing these returns as soon as possible to avoid the wrath of any potential IRS action, such as a levy on their bank accounts.

3) You can incur additional penalties for not paying your taxes

If you fail to pay your taxes due, you will incur additional penalties for failure to pay. Taxpayers who request an extension of time to file should keep in mind that this it is not an extension of time to pay. To avoid additional penalties, taxpayers should file by the deadline and pay as much as they can, even if they are unable to pay the entire amount due. You will still have a failure to pay penalty, but it’s much less. Then you can work with a specialized tax resolution expert to help you negotiate a tax settlement.

4) You can be subject to an increased tax bill if the IRS prepares your taxes for you

The IRS may prepare a “Substitute For Return” for delinquent taxpayers, in which they won’t be able to file for all of their personal exceptions or allowable deductions. Because these returns are filed in the best interest of the government, the only deductions they’ll usually see are the standard deduction and one personal exemption, subjecting them to a larger tax liability. So it’s important for individuals to file their 2008 tax return as well as any prior delinquent tax returns as soon as possible to save money and avoid significant long-term consequences.

5) You must have all prior tax returns filed to be eligible for income tax relief

All back tax returns must be filed before the IRS will even entertain any type of tax settlement like an offer in compromise or monthly payment plan arrangement. The good news is the sooner you take care of your delinquent taxes, the less penalties and interest you’ll owe.

I believe there’s a solution to every problem. For delinquent taxpayer, it’s never too late for to resolve your tax debt and avoid IRS penalties.

For more information on receiving income tax relief or help resolving back taxes, visit www.taxresolution.com for a free tax relief consultation or call 866-IRS-PROBLEMS.