Guess the 15th poster

[Finch]

I've lost count. But this must be pretty close.

[skjaeran]

I've lost count. But this must be pretty close.

If I haven't miscounted, you are the 15th poster Frances (including the opening poster of course). :lol:

[Gerben42]

I demand a recount! :lol: Maybe after all one of the posts was just a dimpled post?

[Aberlour10]

Nothing is clearly here :lol: Who is the winner, who will drink a free beer in Frisco :D Maybe it is time to ask a new "challange-guestion" in this amazing thread??? a tie-break one, sudden death or golden goal..like! :D

[Finch]

OK as a tie break:

 

It's about 11 of a Saturday evening here.

My husband and I are in the same room.

 

What music is playing?

What are we doing?

 

(If anyone gets both of these, they must have a hidden webcam somewhere...)

 

hint to no. 1: a piece of choral music written by an Austrian with English words

hint to no. 2: it's causing a great deal of confusion, aggravation & irritation and is unrelated to bridge

[Fluffy]

any boys or pets implied?

[Aberlour10]

hint to no. 1:  a piece of choral music written by an Austrian with English words

hint to no. 2: it's causing a great deal of confusion, aggravation & irritation and is unrelated to bridge

OK..my guess:

 

1) A piece of music written by J. Haydn, maybe "Lord Nelson Mass"...?

 

2) You are discussing about....a model of new car for the family :) ???

[gwnn]

i counted Fluffy as 15th but that's not sure cause 13 is already well beyond my counting abilities, let alone 15

[david_c]

hint to no. 1:  a piece of choral music written by an Austrian with English words

hint to no. 2: it's causing a great deal of confusion, aggravation & irritation and is unrelated to bridge

OK..my guess:

 

1) A piece of music written by J. Haydn, maybe "Lord Nelson Mass"...?

Hmm, no, I've sung that (not my cup of tea to be honest) and I can assure you it was in Latin. If it's Haydn it's more likely to be The Creation.

[gwnn]

oops, Harald is right. Matt wrote so many times that I haven't counted him, sry. :)

[Finch]

hint to no. 1:  a piece of choral music written by an Austrian with English words

hint to no. 2: it's causing a great deal of confusion, aggravation & irritation and is unrelated to bridge

OK..my guess:

 

1) A piece of music written by J. Haydn, maybe "Lord Nelson Mass"...?

Hmm, no, I've sung that (not my cup of tea to be honest) and I can assure you it was in Latin. If it's Haydn it's more likely to be The Creation.

Correct.

 

You can have half of my beer.

 

Who gets the other half?

 

(no boys, pets or cars involved, but there is a spreadsheet)

[helene_t]

(no boys, pets or cars involved, but there is a spreadsheet)

Oh you're filling in the tax form.

 

Is "the creation" particularely suited for that activity? I never fill in tax forms and never listen to music, I wouldn't know.

[GeeGee]

No 2: - Scrabble?

 

I met a new bridge partner at a Christmas bridge holiday last year. She wasn't that hot at bridge, but we had some fun spare time playing 'rude word Scrabble'

 

Geoff

 

Edit:- Oops, hadn't seen the bit about the spreadsheet. How can you and Jeffrey work on a spreadsheet at the same time? Or is that what's causing the aggravation?

 

:D

Edited July 23, 2007 by GeeGee

[Echognome]

I can't imagine it being taxes in England. They make them a lot easier than in the states (less deductions!). I also don't see why anyone would need a spreadsheet for scrabble.

 

I'm racking my brain to think of anything frustrating involving a spreadsheet. Are you trying to categorize your music collection? Or figuring out what your monthly payments are going to be for buying a home?

[Finch]

helene is right.

 

Echo might be right in theory, but in spite of having a maths degree, working in finance and being married to a professional personal tax advisor, it's still quite hard work.

 

_Really_ avid readers of these forums will be aware that I spent a good chunk of the last (tax) year working in the Netherlands. That has added a serious layer of complication to my English tax return, as verious allowances & things that I was paid are taxable in NL but not in England, and vice versa. And of course the Dutch tax year is a sensible 1st Jan - 31st Dec while the UK tax year ends on the 5th April, so all the 'annual summaries' given to me by the Dutch are useless.

 

And to make matters more complicated I was paid on a 'tax equalisation' basis which, for the unitiated, means my spreadsheet has to solve simultaneous equations...

 

But it's basically all done now, and I'm owed a nice large refund. So the beer is well-deserved.

[helene_t]

_Really_ avid readers of these forums will be aware that I spent a good chunk of the last (tax) year working in the Netherlands. That has added a serious layer of complication to my English tax return, as verious allowances & things that I was paid are taxable in NL but not in England, and vice versa. And of course the Dutch tax year is a sensible 1st Jan - 31st Dec while the UK tax year ends on the 5th April, so all the 'annual summaries' given to me by the Dutch are useless.

When you move between two countries with syncronous fiscal years, the optimal date of moving is 1st of july since you'll get a whole year of base deductions in both countries. At least that's how it has worked everytime I moved between DK and NL. Now what you write about the UK situation opens new opportunities. You may have heard about the right-extremist Danish politician and tax lawyer Mogens Glistrup (the last thing I heard about his party was that they negotiated fusion with a left-extremist one but that's another story).

 

He set up a cyclical chain of fictive companies with different fiscal years. By transfering deductable liabilities between the companies at well-chosen dates he could reduce his tax bill to litterally zero. One of his business partners had to sue him to get out of his "tax circus". He ended up spending two years in prison after a very controversial lawsuit.

[Gerben42]

He set up a cyclical chain of fictive companies with different fiscal years. By transfering deductable liabilities between the companies at well-chosen dates he could reduce his tax bill to litterally zero. One of his business partners had to sue him to get out of his "tax circus". He ended up spending two years in prison after a very controversial lawsuit.

 

Of course this should not work but if it did, what law did he break?

[helene_t]

He set up a cyclical chain of fictive companies with different fiscal years. By transferring deductable liabilities between the companies at well-chosen dates he could reduce his tax bill to litter ally zero. One of his business partners had to sue him to get out of his "tax circus". He ended up spending two years in prison after a very controversial lawsuit.

 

Of course this should not work but if it did, what law did he break?

There is some vague Danish law that outlaws financial constructions the only purpose of which is to generate tax deductions. I don't think it has ever happened (except in the case mentioned) that someone was sent to jail for violating that law. It's quite common that people fill in non-deductable items in the "deductable" fields on the tax form. If you volunteer the complete documentation of the item, thereby enabling the authorities to verify the deduction, you're probably not a criminal and they will just modify your form and tax you accordingly. There are gray-area cases, for example if you just specify "home-work transportation expenses" without volunteering complete details, and when the authorities ask for details it turns out to be transportation from a temporary resort that doesn't count as "home", but even then they probably won't fine you and certainly not put you to jail.

 

Maybe the judges found that Glistrup, being a tax lawyer, must have known that the deductables were in fact not deductable because they were fictive transaction and/or because they served a tax evasion purpose only.

 

Personally I think that the fact that he gave full disclosure (going public with a message like "look how silly the system is, I earn millions and don't pay any taxes while people on minimum wages pay some 50% of their income" ) should have been considered a mildening circumstance, if anything. The tax circus had been running for years, everyone knew exactly what was going on, and the local tax authorities just said that there was nothing they could do about it. But what do I know about law.

[Gerben42]

There is some vague Danish law that outlaws financial constructions the only purpose of which is to generate tax deductions.

 

Sounds like the ACBL rule that bans destructive methods...

[Rain]

Ah misunderstood the opening question obviously.

[mike777]

He set up a cyclical chain of fictive companies with different fiscal years. By transferring deductable liabilities between the companies at well-chosen dates he could reduce his tax bill to litter ally zero. One of his business partners had to sue him to get out of his "tax circus". He ended up spending two years in prison after a very controversial lawsuit.

 

Of course this should not work but if it did, what law did he break?

There is some vague Danish law that outlaws financial constructions the only purpose of which is to generate tax deductions. I don't think it has ever happened (except in the case mentioned) that someone was sent to jail for violating that law. It's quite common that people fill in non-deductable items in the "deductable" fields on the tax form. If you volunteer the complete documentation of the item, thereby enabling the authorities to verify the deduction, you're probably not a criminal and they will just modify your form and tax you accordingly. There are gray-area cases, for example if you just specify "home-work transportation expenses" without volunteering complete details, and when the authorities ask for details it turns out to be transportation from a temporary resort that doesn't count as "home", but even then they probably won't fine you and certainly not put you to jail.

 

Maybe the judges found that Glistrup, being a tax lawyer, must have known that the deductables were in fact not deductable because they were fictive transaction and/or because they served a tax evasion purpose only.

 

Personally I think that the fact that he gave full disclosure (going public with a message like "look how silly the system is, I earn millions and don't pay any taxes while people on minimum wages pay some 50% of their income" ) should have been considered a mildening circumstance, if anything. The tax circus had been running for years, everyone knew exactly what was going on, and the local tax authorities just said that there was nothing they could do about it. But what do I know about law.

Sort of very common in many countries but I would rephrase.

 

In America business tax deductions are only deductible if they served some business purpose which is trying to make a real profit. Note the words trying to make a real profit.

 

If you are not trying to make a real profit but you do not deduct, no problem, no law broken.

 

IF you are not trying to make a real profit, and you deduct, that is tax fraud.

 

What does "trying to make a real profit" mean?

 

Well if you make a profit in proportion to tax write offs no problem.

 

If not expect to have to prove you were in tax court that knows all the tricks and more compared to you, which is almost impossible. :)

 

Yes the tax laws are vague and vague, not in your favor but the governments. :)