Home Page link  

Payroll

  
Groups | Search | About
User Password
Register Now! Lost Password?

QuickBooks Discussion board - Discussions about the popular financial software by Intuit

 Post an article  get this group's latest topics as an RSS feed add this group's latest topics to your My MSN content add this group's latest topics to your My Yahoo content  add this group's latest topics to your Google content  YahooMyWeb Yahoo!  Google Google  Windows Live Favorites Windows Live  del.icio.us del.icio.us  digg digg  Add to Netscape Netscape
Subject Author Date
Payroll GoBruins 10-22-2006
Posted by L on October 23, 2006, 7:44 am
Please log in for more thread options
> TKnTexas wrote:
>> The number of dependents is one way for a person to control the amount
>> of Federal tax withheld. A single person with a big mortgage might
>> claim 6 dependents, having none in reality. I think if an employee
>> claims more than 10 you have to send a copy in to IRS, or Social
>> Security Administration. Just like a head of household claiming zero
>> exemptions because they need more tax taken out of his checks.
>
> The send it in ten rule went away last year. The IRS now uses a computer
> check to be sure the worker is paying enough. Employer will get a letter
> if enough isn't being collected in advance.
>
>> Back in the early 80s a coworker claimed 99. He took the extra money
>> and invested it. He filed his tax return as soon as the W2s were ready
>> and paid his taxes in full. The IRS doesn't want this happening. So
>> hence the rule for dependents claimed exceeding 10.
>
> Yes, if everyone paid on April 15, the US would be bankrupt. Net 365,
> what a concept.
>
Ummm.. NOT net 365. More like net 105 (Dec 31 end of year, Apr 15
collections).

Quarterly payments, and withholding, were introduced after WWII.



Posted by HeyBub on October 23, 2006, 10:18 am
Please log in for more thread options
 Golden California Girls wrote:
> TKnTexas wrote:
>> The number of dependents is one way for a person to control the
>> amount of Federal tax withheld. A single person with a big mortgage
>> might
>> claim 6 dependents, having none in reality. I think if an employee
>> claims more than 10 you have to send a copy in to IRS, or Social
>> Security Administration. Just like a head of household claiming zero
>> exemptions because they need more tax taken out of his checks.
>
> The send it in ten rule went away last year. The IRS now uses a
> computer check to be sure the worker is paying enough. Employer will
> get a letter if enough isn't being collected in advance.
>
>> Back in the early 80s a coworker claimed 99. He took the extra money
>> and invested it. He filed his tax return as soon as the W2s were
>> ready and paid his taxes in full. The IRS doesn't want this happening.
>> So
>> hence the rule for dependents claimed exceeding 10.
>
> Yes, if everyone paid on April 15, the US would be bankrupt. Net
> 365, what a concept.
>

When the income tax went into effect in California, Governor Reagan refused
to allow payroll deductions. He said he wanted people to see, and pay, the
total at one time. He wanted it to "hurt."



Posted by L on October 25, 2006, 8:37 am
Please log in for more thread options
> Golden California Girls wrote:
>> TKnTexas wrote:
>>> The number of dependents is one way for a person to control the
>>> amount of Federal tax withheld. A single person with a big mortgage
>>> might
>>> claim 6 dependents, having none in reality. I think if an employee
>>> claims more than 10 you have to send a copy in to IRS, or Social
>>> Security Administration. Just like a head of household claiming zero
>>> exemptions because they need more tax taken out of his checks.
>>
>> The send it in ten rule went away last year. The IRS now uses a
>> computer check to be sure the worker is paying enough. Employer will
>> get a letter if enough isn't being collected in advance.
>>
>>> Back in the early 80s a coworker claimed 99. He took the extra money
>>> and invested it. He filed his tax return as soon as the W2s were
>>> ready and paid his taxes in full. The IRS doesn't want this happening.
>>> So
>>> hence the rule for dependents claimed exceeding 10.
>>
>> Yes, if everyone paid on April 15, the US would be bankrupt. Net
>> 365, what a concept.
>>
>
> When the income tax went into effect in California, Governor Reagan
> refused to allow payroll deductions. He said he wanted people to see, and
> pay, the total at one time. He wanted it to "hurt."

Actually, there is a logic to that.

I was browsing a book at the local bookstore (forgot the title, but it was a
book arguing for a 'flat tax'), and the author brought up the point that
BEFORE withholding, folks could tell you exactly how much they paid in
income tax. It was a check they sent out like any other bill, and if the
rate went up they knew it, and were vocal about it. They contrasted it to
today, where, thanks to withholding and good PR, folks on April 15th are
more likely to know how much of a refund they expect.

Try it. Ask a good buddy what they spend on taxes in April and wait to
here - "I'm not paying anything, the IRS is sending me back x dollars".



Posted by Steve Scott on October 25, 2006, 4:53 pm
Please log in for more thread options
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 08:37:11 -0400, "L"

>> When the income tax went into effect in California, Governor Reagan
>> refused to allow payroll deductions. He said he wanted people to see, and
>> pay, the total at one time. He wanted it to "hurt."
>
>Actually, there is a logic to that.
>
>I was browsing a book at the local bookstore (forgot the title, but it was a
>book arguing for a 'flat tax'), and the author brought up the point that
>BEFORE withholding, folks could tell you exactly how much they paid in
>income tax. It was a check they sent out like any other bill, and if the
>rate went up they knew it, and were vocal about it. They contrasted it to
>today, where, thanks to withholding and good PR, folks on April 15th are
>more likely to know how much of a refund they expect.
>
>Try it. Ask a good buddy what they spend on taxes in April and wait to
>here - "I'm not paying anything, the IRS is sending me back x dollars".

It's a testament to our educational system.

--
Age 'n Treachery Overcome Youth 'n Skill





Posted by TKnTexas on October 23, 2006, 10:39 am
Please log in for more thread options
I must have missed that notification. In all of the years it was in
effect, I never had to use it. One employee was going to do 12 and I
mentioned the rule and he knocked it back to 9.
TK

Golden California Girls wrote:

> The send it in ten rule went away last year. The IRS now uses a computer check
> to be sure the worker is paying enough. Employer will get a letter if enough
> isn't being collected in advance.
>
[snip]


Similar ThreadsPosted
fudging quickbooks payroll start date if not using qb payroll service September 29, 2006, 10:01 am
how to add payroll entries if not using qb payroll? September 25, 2006, 10:12 am
Payroll February 22, 2007, 9:47 am
Payroll October 23, 2007, 1:58 pm
payroll May 23, 2008, 1:48 pm
Re: Payroll reports June 28, 2006, 12:59 am
Payroll Taxes July 17, 2006, 5:34 pm
Quickbooks and payroll October 11, 2006, 11:24 am
Payroll Services? November 28, 2006, 3:42 pm
Payroll Tax Credit December 2, 2006, 10:04 pm

Contact Us | Privacy Policy
This site is not affiliated with Intuit - makers of Quickbooks and Quicken software
This site is not affiliated with Sage Software - makers of Peachtree accounting software
XML SitemapXML Sitemap