Tipping in USA/Canada

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:

Craig Welch wrote:

One can be a Permanent Resident of more than one country, as Permanent
Resident is a *legal status*, not an indication of where you are on any
given day.


We've covered that point!

And you still can't seem to understand it


You regularly fail to define whether you're refering to the US (legal)
term(s) or the dictionary definitions.
The fall-back assumption must be that you are using the dictionary
definitions of the words 'permanent resident'.

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:

Craig Welch wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:

Craig Welch wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:


Craig Welch wrote:


Mr. Travel wrote:


Greg Procter wrote:


No, the law cannot apply _in_ other countries.

If the action is committed in another country, the law could still
apply. The action taken against the violator would probably wait until
they are back in the US, but the law APPLIES for the offense committed
in the other country. Maybe your dictionary doesn't have this word?

The best example is Taxation Law ... the IRS extends its reach to 'us
yanks' the world over, does it not?

I'm a New Zealander living in New Zealand - why would I know what the US
tax department does???
In New Zealand the NZIRS only concerns itself with wages or salaries
earned while the individual is resident in NZ.

US law concerns itself with the earnings of people in the US, as well as
the earnings of US Citizens and US Permanent Residents, inside and
outside of the US. There is a hefty exclusion of income, probably
90,000 USD by now, and there are also some credits for foreign taxes
paid. Additionally, IRS probably won't find out any income was earned.
However, that doesn't mean the law doesn't apply.

Any yank working outside the US is going to be paying taxes in the
source country - then the thieving yank government taxes them on already
taxed income - I feel sorry for you all!

So to add to the large (and seemingly growing) number of things you
don't understand ... you've never heard of tax treaties?

Of course I've heard of tax treaties.

You might have heard of them, but if you *understood* them you would not
have made the statement "then the thieving yank government taxes them on
already taxed income".



You just told me the US government taxes them on taxed income!

That would be the case if the foreign tax on the non-excluded income is
lower than the US tax would be.

What happens when the foreign tax is higher than the US tax level.


Do you also understand there is a
substantial income exclusion to start with.

Where?


Do you feel citizens and
permanent residents of a country owe nothing to that country?

I've made no such suggestion.

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:


Yes, Craig, that's telling me that the US taxes US citizens and US PRs
on moneys earned outside the US, particularly "... and there are also
some credits for foreign taxes paid. "

No, you still don't get it.

From my understanding of this, but it was a few years ago when I was
thinking about transferring to Brussels, so research it if you really
want the info.

If the foreign tax rate is higher than the US rate, no additional tax
will be due.

IF the foreign rate is lower than the US rate, you would pay
(approximatelly) the difference up to the US rate, after deducting the
excluded income amount.


So when you said "some credits" you meant "full credits"?

Greg Procter wrote:
"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:


"Mr. Travel" wrote:


Greg Procter wrote:


Well, K-mart wasn't active in New Zealand pre-1970. I would guess, based
on the fact that a K-mart opened about 2km from my then home around
1993-4 that they started in NZ about 1991-2. At that time they could not
have sold "quarts" of oil. As to what is "relevant", you've consistantly
come out of 'left-field' or 'cloud-cuckoo-land' with what you consider
to be relevant, so I need to cover all the bases. At this stage, based
on your past efforts I fully expect you to start an argument about the
number of carats I claim to be in a chaldron!

Whether K-Mart existed in NZ pre-1970 has NOTHING to do with you
understanding approximately what a quart of oil is. The imperial quart
and US quart are close enough in size for you determine I was referring
to a small quanity of oil.



Well the US measure is short change - typical of cheating yanks.

So, NZ short changes it's citizens by using narrow gauge tracks.



Nahh, they're standard here.

Just as the US gallon is standard here.

See, no one is getting short changed.

Greg Procter wrote:

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:


Yes, I've done that - you're effectively saying that a person can be a
permanent resident in two countries at once. That's obviously not
possible, and it has nothing at all to any distinction between the term
and the words.

It has to do with how countries define the term, not the dictionary.


If it's a "term" then you write it capitalized or within quotation
marks, so that it is not confused with the dictionary meaning. This
isn't rocket science.
You could alternatively write "(has) permanent ressidence status".

You sometimes write the abbreviation for NZ in lower case.

Greg Procter wrote:

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:


Craig Welch wrote:


One can be a Permanent Resident of more than one country, as Permanent
Resident is a *legal status*, not an indication of where you are on any
given day.


We've covered that point!

And you still can't seem to understand it



You regularly fail to define whether you're refering to the US (legal)
term(s) or the dictionary definitions.
The fall-back assumption must be that you are using the dictionary
definitions of the words 'permanent resident'.

I thought we were talking about legal restrictions, so I think the legal
definitions would be the ones that matter. For a moment, forget the
equivalent terms "green card holder" and "permanent resident. I am sure
you would also be just as confused with "Resident Alien"
The law cited actually refers to "Resident Alien".

I quoted the section on jurisdiction that includes "Resident Aliens" as
falling under the jurisdiction of the CFR that was cited. If you want
the legal definition of the term, it is listed elsewhere in the
document. That is where you would look it up, not in the dictionary.

Greg Procter wrote:


What happens when the foreign tax is higher than the US tax level.


You wouldn't owe US tax.

Greg Procter wrote:

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:


Yes, Craig, that's telling me that the US taxes US citizens and US PRs
on moneys earned outside the US, particularly "... and there are also
some credits for foreign taxes paid. "

No, you still don't get it.

From my understanding of this, but it was a few years ago when I was
thinking about transferring to Brussels, so research it if you really
want the info.

If the foreign tax rate is higher than the US rate, no additional tax
will be due.

IF the foreign rate is lower than the US rate, you would pay
(approximatelly) the difference up to the US rate, after deducting the
excluded income amount.


So when you said "some credits" you meant "full credits"?

No, I meant some credits.
There is not just one credit you could obtain
It is possible you might have more tax credits than you would owe in
taxes. In some cases, this would give you a refund that is higher than
the taxes paid.

If you have additional question go to irs.gov or your nearest US tax
specialist. I am sure there is at least one in nz

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:
"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:


"Mr. Travel" wrote:


Greg Procter wrote:


Well, K-mart wasn't active in New Zealand pre-1970. I would guess, based
on the fact that a K-mart opened about 2km from my then home around
1993-4 that they started in NZ about 1991-2. At that time they could not
have sold "quarts" of oil. As to what is "relevant", you've consistantly
come out of 'left-field' or 'cloud-cuckoo-land' with what you consider
to be relevant, so I need to cover all the bases. At this stage, based
on your past efforts I fully expect you to start an argument about the
number of carats I claim to be in a chaldron!

Whether K-Mart existed in NZ pre-1970 has NOTHING to do with you
understanding approximately what a quart of oil is. The imperial quart
and US quart are close enough in size for you determine I was referring
to a small quanity of oil.



Well the US measure is short change - typical of cheating yanks.

So, NZ short changes it's citizens by using narrow gauge tracks.



Nahh, they're standard here.

Just as the US gallon is standard here.

See, no one is getting short changed.


Well Duhh! Exactly who do you think we're selling the New Zealand track
gauge to??
OTOH the US sells commodities (or attempts to sell) around the world in
your short-change measures.
I'm sure no-one cares that you have your own weird and non-standard
measurements, just give them unique names and stop pretending that they
are proper imperial measures.

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:


Yes, I've done that - you're effectively saying that a person can be a
permanent resident in two countries at once. That's obviously not
possible, and it has nothing at all to any distinction between the term
and the words.

It has to do with how countries define the term, not the dictionary.


If it's a "term" then you write it capitalized or within quotation
marks, so that it is not confused with the dictionary meaning. This
isn't rocket science.
You could alternatively write "(has) permanent ressidence status".

You sometimes write the abbreviation for NZ in lower case.

I probably had a tired finger that day, or I was using the other hand to
keep the cat off the keyboard - did you get all confused between the
nation and the Urdu word for 'golden dung beetle'?