Jump to content

User talk:Oldtaxguy: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
tax deduction article posted, removed from here; corporate tax article available
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs)
11,637,095 edits
m Fixed Lint errors in signatures. (Task 2)
 
(58 intermediate revisions by 25 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
Tax deduction article has been posted.
Tax deduction article has been posted. Corporate tax article has been posted. [[User:Oldtaxguy|Oldtaxguy]] ([[User talk:Oldtaxguy#top|talk]]) 19:54, 9 May 2010 (UTC)


Corporate tax in the United States article enhancements posted.[[User:Oldtaxguy|Oldtaxguy]] ([[User talk:Oldtaxguy#top|talk]]) 19:36, 10 May 2010 (UTC)


Tax credit article posted June 6.[[User:Oldtaxguy|Oldtaxguy]] ([[User talk:Oldtaxguy#top|talk]]) 02:59, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
==Advertising==
I was not advertising the dude I was doing a project for school never met the guy in my life. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Crog18|Crog18]] ([[User talk:Crog18|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Crog18|contribs]]) 20:25, 26 May 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
==John Battelle==
How does it sound like a advertisement?


==Robin Hood Tax==
{{Globalize |date=April 20, 2010}}
Hello Oldtaxguy and welcome to Wikipedia. As a new editor its fair enough if youre not aware of this, but when you canvassed Arthur Rubin and Framspear for support you were going against several guidelines we have here, specifically [[WP:AGF]] , [[WP:Battle]] and [[WP:Canvassing]].
{{Refimprove|date=April 2010}}
Here on Wikipedia we're supposed to be non adversarial where possible. A good way to collaborate with others is to always assume good faith, as least as your initial default position. Some editors are atheists while some are evangelical Christians, some are libertarians while some are socialists, but most are united in wanting to build a quality encyclopaedia. Our [[WP:NPOV]] policy helps us all work together to create fair and accurate articles, essentially by ensuring different points of view on a topic are presented in accordance with their weighting in quality sources. So much as I respect someone who is willing to fight for what they believe in , in future please avoid assumeing editors with a different POV are lobbyists and please avoid asking editors for help in "battleing" others - at least untill youre sure they really are up for a battle. That said, I hope you continue to contribute and enjoy editing! [[User:FeydHuxtable|FeydHuxtable]] ([[User talk:FeydHuxtable|talk]]) 16:33, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
'''Corporate tax''' or '''company tax''' refers to a tax imposed on entities that are taxed at the entity level in a particular jurisdiction. Such taxes may include income or other taxes. The tax systems of most countries impose an [[income tax]] at the entity level on certain type(s) of entities (company or [[corporation]]). Many systems additionally tax owners or members of those entities on [[dividends]] or other distributions by the entity to the members. The tax generally is imposed on net '''taxable income'''. Net taxable income for corporate tax is generally financial statement income with modifications, and may be defined in great detail within the system. The rate of tax varies by jurisdiction. The tax may have an alternative base, such as assets, payroll, or income computed in an alternative manner.
==Hi, you have answers==


Hi Oldtaxguy, you have answers waiting for you at the [[Wikipedia:Help_desk#May_I_publish_original_research_about_origins_of_5_Wikipedia_articles_on_my_user_talk_page.3F|help desk]]. Cheers.[[User:Wifione|'''<span style="color: red; text-shadow:silver 0.3em 0.3em 0.1em"> ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ </span>''']] [[User talk:Wifione|'''<sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ</sub><sup style="margin-left:-3ex"> ♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣</sup>''']] 04:03, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Most income tax systems provide that certain types of '''corporate events''' are not taxable transactions. These generally include events related to formation or reorganization of the corporation. In addition, most systems provide specific rules for taxation of the entity and/or its members upon winding up or dissolution of the entity.


== Robin Hood tax & Oxfam: chronology ==
In systems where financing costs are allowed as reductions of the tax base ([[tax deductions]]), rules may apply that differentiate between classes of member-provided financing. In such systems, items characterized as [[interest]] may be deductible, subject to '''interest limitations''', while items characterized as dividends are not. Some systems limit deductions based on simple formulas, such as a [[debt-to-equity ratio]], while other systems have more complex rules.


I would like to publicly apologize to FeydHuxtable if he is not actively connected with Oxfam or the RHT publicity campaign. In such case, my comments were inappropriately directed to him, for which I am genuinely sorry. Please forgive ''my'' over enthusiasm for a cause (Wikipedia integrity) in which I believe.
Some systems provide a mechanism whereby '''groups''' of related corporations may obtain benefit from losses, credits, or other items of all members within the group. Mechanisms include combined or consolidated returns as well as group relief (direct benefit from items of another member).


I have no opinion on the RHT or similar taxes. I do have a strong opinion that Wikipedia should not be used as an advertising platform, and believe it has been with respect to this article and others indicated below. There surely have been those who, thru their own enthusiasm, have unwittingly participated in this advertising in good faith attempts to enhance Wikipedia as an encyclopedia. I do not intend to cast aspersions on any of them.
A few systems provide for partial integration of entity and member taxation. This is often accomplished by '''imputation systems''' or [[franking credits]]. In the past, mechanisms have existed for advance payment of member tax by corporations, with such payment offsetting entity level tax.


A brief history of this article and 3 related articles should help illustrate the advertising problem. It appears that the RHT and 3 other articles were created by Oxfam and its affiliates to promote its advertising campaign. The following, where there are not in-line references, is culled from contribution and article histories on Wikipedia itself. The history before 9 Feb 10 is, I think, ''very relevant'' to the trail.
Many systems (particularly sub-country level systems) impose a tax on particular corporate attributes. Such '''non-income taxes''' may be based on capital stock issued or authorized (either by number of shares or value), total equity, net capital, or other measures unique to corporations.


2001: War On Want and New Economics Foundation publish a [http://www.neweconomics.org/sites/neweconomics.org/files/Robin_Hood_Tax.pdf position paper] entitled "The Robin Hood Tax" advocating that a Tobin tax be levied by a new international "Global Development Commission" with authority to require nations to levy the tax, which would be remitted to such commission for global "development" projects.
Corporations, like other entities, may be subject to [[withholding tax]] obligations upon making certain varieties of payments to others. These obligations are generally not the tax of the corporation, but the system may impose penalties on the corporation or its officers or employees for failing to withhold and pay over such taxes.


4 Sep 09: Oxfam issues [http://www.oxfam.org.uk/resources/policy/debt_aid/money-for-nothing-g20.html "Oxfam International G20 Media Briefing"] calling for "a Currency Transaction Tax (CTT) of at least 0.005% on international currency transactions".
==Corporation defined==
A [[corporation]] is a juridical person organized under the corporate or company laws of some jurisdiction. The jurisdiction may be a country or a subdivision of a country. For example, in Canada, a corporation may be organized under either Federal or provincial laws. Most jurisdictions recognize as corporations entities organized under the corporate or company laws of other jurisdictions. Under many tax systems, any entity providing limitations on the liability of all members for the actions of the entity is considered a corporation. Characterization as a corporation for tax purposes is based on the form of organization in most taxing jurisdictions. One notable exception applies for United States Federal<ref>See United States tax regulations at [http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2009/aprqtr/pdf/26cfr301.7701-2.pdf 26 CFR 301.7701-2] and [http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2009/aprqtr/pdf/26cfr301.7701-3.pdf -3].</ref> and most state income taxes within the United states under which an entity may (with exceptions) elect to be treated as a corporation and taxed at the entity level or taxed only at the member level. See [[Limited liability company]], [[Partnership taxation]], [[S Corporation]].


27 Oct 09: user:389melanie account is created. This user creates & re-edits Wiki article [Ox-Tales] on books released by Oxfam in July 09. The article is first created on the userpage and then posted as a Wiki article. User:389melanie edits this and several Oxfam related articles (and nothing else) through 1 Dec. In her [http://melaniesblog.usual.ca/?m=200910 blog] in a post titled Ox Tales on 28 Oct she states " I’ve now been interning for Oxfam for 3 weeks … The other completely awesome thing I’m doing is learning to use Wikipedia, so that I can write articles and edit the Oxfam related pages." On 14 Oct she stated " Just got back from Oxford, having spend 3 days there starting my new job and meeting the lady I’ll be staying with while I’m there." (Note: the web site hosting her blog describes themselves this way: " The Usual Company is a small firm located in Toronto Canada servicing businesses in the GTA with some recent interest in the UK. Projects are well planned, scheduled to your fast paced needs, and closely monitored through the life of the contract. We pride ourselves on client relations and open communication.")
Governments may impose tax on corporations as separately from their owners. Most jurisdictions tax companies or corporations at the entity rather than the member level.<ref>See, e.g., Canada {{cn}} and United States [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000011----000-.html 26 USC 11].</ref> Members of the corporate entity are generally not subject to tax on the entity's earnings until such earnings are distributed. By contrast, most jurisdictions tax partnerships at the member level and not the entity level. Members of a partnership are generally subject to tax on the partnership's earnings as they are earned rather than when they are distributed.


5 Nov 09: head of Oxfam UK makes a [http://www.oxfam.org.uk/applications/blogs/pressoffice/?p=8127 statement] to some number of members of the press proposing a financial transaction tax, first using the key phrase "a tiny tax on banks". Note: this phrase is repeated throughout the RHT publicity campaign and on the RHT web site.
==Taxation of corporations==
Corporations may be taxed on their incomes, property, or existence by various jurisdictions. Many jurisdictions impose a tax based on the existence or equity structure of the corporation. For example, Maryland imposes a tax on corporations organized in that state based on the number of shares of capital stock issued and outstanding. Many jurisdictions instead impose a tax based on stated or computed capital, often including retained profits.


7 Dec 09: user:389melanie posts a request on Wiki Helpdesk "Hi there, I'm trying to get together a small group of people to try and improve the information about Oxfam on Wikipedia…"
Most jurisdictions tax corporations on their income.<ref>See, e.g., United Kingdom [http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/ukpga_19880001_en_2 Income and Corporation Taxes Act of 1988] as amended (UK ICTA88) section 6, United States [ http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000011----000-.html 26 USC 11].</ref> Generally, this tax is imposed at a specific rate or range of rates on taxable income as defined within the system. Some systems have a separate body of law or separate provisions relating to corporate taxation.<ref>For example, whilst the United Kingdom consolidated income tax laws applying to individuals and corporations in 1988 (UK ICTA88), the charge to tax remains separate, with significant differences in details. Compare [http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/ukpga_19880001_en_2 UK ICTA88] sections 1 through 5 with sections 6 through 12, and subsequent differences.</ref> In such cases, the law may apply only to entities and not to individuals operating a trade. Such laws may differentiate between broad types of income earned by corporations and tax such types of income differently. Generally, however, most such systems tax all income of a corporation in the same manner.<ref>Canada and the United States tax all types of income at the same rate, but provide different rates of tax depending on income levels or size of entity. See [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000011----000-.html 26 USC 11].</ref>


19 Dec 09: 389melanie arrives in Toronto per her [http://melaniesblog.usual.ca/?m=200912 blog]
Some systems (e.g., Canada and the United States) tax corporations under the same framework of tax law as individuals. In such systems, there are normally taxation differences related to differences between the inherent natures of corporations and individuals or unincorporated entities. For example, individuals are not formed, amalgamated, or acquired, and corporations do not generally incur medical expenses except by way of compensating individuals.<ref>See, e.g., United States [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sup_01_26_10_A_20_1_30_B_40_VII.html itemized deductions for individuals and [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sup_01_26_10_A_20_1_30_B_40_VIII.html special deductions for corporations] as well as Other corporate events below.</ref>


21 Dec 09: user:Boyd Reimer begins series of edits to article Tobin tax. This is this editor's first edit to any tax article. Edits occur every few minutes from 15:57 to 18:03. More edits to this article on 21, 24, 25 and 29 Dec. On 30 Dec 09 through 4 Jan 10, user edits article numerous times fairly continuously throughout each day. From 21 Dec to 4 Jan, the article is expanded from 18k to 110k. Note: an anonymous user in Poland removed 7 blatant advertisements for Halifax Initiative, a group closely associated with Oxfam.
Many systems allow [[tax credits]] for specific items. Such direct reductions of tax are commonly allowed for foreign taxes on the same income and for [[withholding tax]]. Often these credits are the same as those available to individuals or for members of flow through entities such as partnerships.


Note: a real person named Boyd M L Reimer is a freelance web designer and developer in Toronto. His Flikr slogan is "Results online don't just happen. They're planned." Also Note: of the 17 listed members of Halifax Initiative (an organization purportedly in Canada) members except Oxfam, 3 labor unions, and 1 other (i.e., 12 of 17) have anonymously hosted websites. The initiative's website is also anonymously hosted.
Most systems tax both domestic and foreign corporations. Often, domestic corporations are taxed on worldwide income while foreign corporations are taxed only on income from sources within the jurisdiction. Many jurisdictions imposing an income tax impose such tax income from a [[permanent establishment]] within the jurisdiction.<ref>(English language {{cn}} for France or Germany.</ref>


23-24 Dec 09: user:Benwm edits Tobin tax article. This editor then and subsequently provided about 125 edits of Tobin tax and Financial transaction tax (see below), 14 other edits of related articles, and no other activity. All this editors edits were shortly following Boyd Reimer edits of those articles.
Corporations are also subject to [[property tax]], [[payroll tax]], [[withholding tax]], [[excise tax]], [[customs duties]], [[value added tax]], and other common taxes, generally in the same manner as other taxpayers. These, however, are rarely referred to as “corporate tax.”


1 Jan 10: user:WWWords created. This user edited only the Tobin tax article. Last edit 4 March 10.
==Taxable income==
Most systems impose [[income tax]] at a specified rate of tax times taxable income as defined in the system. Many systems define taxable income by reference to net income before income taxes per financial statements prepared under locally accepted accounting principles. Such income may be decreased for income subject to [[tax exemption]]. Other adjustments often apply.


3 Jan 10: anonymous user:78.33.152.244 in UK adds German text from an interview of Tobin from Die Spiegel and makes certain other minor edits over 10 minutes. Reimer edits pause during this, and 15 minutes later he edits around the newly added German text with description "I created a new section and moved existing material to the new section without changing it."
Some systems define taxable income within the system. The United States system defines [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000063----000-.html taxable income] for a corporation as all [[gross income]] (sales plus other income minus cost of goods sold and tax exempt income) less allowable [[tax deductions]], without the allowance of the [[standard deduction]] applicable to individuals.


4 Jan 10: user:Boyd Reimer creates article Financial transaction tax and does multiple edits through
Principles for recognizing income and deductions may differ from financial accounting principles. Key areas of difference include differences in the timing of income or deduction, [[tax exemption]] for certain income, and disallowance or limitation of certain [[tax deductions]]. The United States system requires that these differences be disclosed in considerable detail for non-small corporations on Schedule [http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f1120sm3.pdf M-3 to Form 1120].


4 Jan 10 through 10 March 10: users Boyd Reimer, Benwm, Cosmic Cube, and WWWords perform multiple, frequent edits to Tobin tax article, with almost no participation by other users. (1 anonymous user complained of NPOV and OR)
Most systems tax resident corporations (generally those organized within the country) on their worldwide income, and nonresident corporations only on their income from sources within the country.<ref>See, e.g., United States taxation of foreign corporations at [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sup_01_26_10_A_20_1_30_N_40_II_50_B.html 26 USC 881-885].</ref> A few systems, such as [http://www.ird.gov.hk/eng/tax/bus_pft.htm#03 Hong Kong], tax resident and nonresident corporations only on income from sources within the country.


13 Jan 10: user:Boyd Reimer creates article Currency transaction tax. This article was edited by him alone through 27 Jan, then by him and Cosmic Cube, with 6 other edits through 26 Feb by 2 anonymous users, one of whom resolves to a privacy service in Romania and the other is the same one who complained in Tobin tax about NPOV, and a minor edit by another user.
==Corporate tax rates==
Corporate tax rates generally are the same for differing types of income. However, many systems have graduated tax rate systems under which corporations with lower levels of income pay a lower rate of tax.<ref>See, e.g., [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000011----000-.html 26 USC 11], which imposes rates varying from 15% on the first $50,000 of income to 35% on incomes over $10,000,000, with phase-outs.</ref> Some systems impose tax at different rates for different types of corporations.<ref>E.g., [http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/bsnss/tpcs/crprtns/typs/menu-eng.html Canada] allows lower rates for some smaller corporations.</ref> Tax rates vary by jurisdiction. In addition, some countries have sub-country level jurisdictions that also impose corporate income tax.<ref>Examples include Canada, Germany, Japan, Switzerland, and the United States. Sub-country level jurisdictions may include states, provinces, cantons, prefectures, cities, or other levels of government particular to the jurisdiction.</ref> Some jurisdictions also impose tax at a different rate on an alternative tax base (see below). Note that some entities may be eligible for [[tax exemption]] on part or all of their income in some jurisdictions.


13 Jan 10: user:Boyd Reimer creates article Spahn tax. This article was edited by him alone through 27 Jan, then by him and Cosmic Cube as only editors changing more than 20 characters.
Examples of corporate tax rates for a few English-speaking countries for 2009 include:
*Australia: 30%
*[http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/bsnss/tpcs/crprtns/rts-eng.html Canada]: Federal 11% or 18% plus provincial 1% to 16%. Note: the rates are additive.
*Hong Kong: [http://www.ird.gov.hk/eng/tax/bus_pft.htm#10 16.5%]
*Ireland: 12.5% on trading (business) income, and 25% on nontrading income
*New Zealand: 30%
*Singapore: 4.25% to 17%
*United Kingdom: 21% to 28%
*United States: [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000011----000-.html Federal 15% to 35%]. States: 0% to 10%, deductible in computing Federal taxable income. Some cities: up to 9%, deductible in computing Federal taxable income. The Federal Alternative Minimum Tax of 20% is imposed on regular taxable income with adjustments.


22 Jan 10: [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8476013.stm BBC] item on RHT states that "Some of the world's top A-listers are to call for a new tax on banks only days after announcing near record profits and bonuses. The celebrities - none of whom have yet been formally confirmed - are set to front a worldwide campaign…" and "Film-maker Richard Curtis is the man behind the celebrity campaign"


27 Jan 10: user:Cosmic Cube created. This user edited only the Tobin tax, Currency transaction tax and Spahn tax articles (see below).
See also:
*[[Tax rates of Europe]]
*[[Tax rates around the world]]
Note: tax rates quoted above and in referenced Wikipedia articles may not be current or accurate.


06 Feb 10: YouTube user Robin Hood Tax created by robinhoodtax.org
==Distribution of earnings==
Most systems that tax corporations also impose income tax on shareholders of corporations when earnings are distributed.<ref>See, e.g., [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000061----000-.html 26 USC 61(a)(7)].</ref> Such distribution of earnings is generally referred to as a [[dividend]]. The tax may be at reduced rates. For example, the United States provides for reduced amounts of tax on dividends received by individuals and by corporations.<ref>See [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000001----000-.html 26 USC 1(h)(11)] for the reduced rate of tax for individuals, and [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000243----000-.html 26 USC 243](a)(1) and (c) for a deduction for dividends received by corporations.</ref> By contrast, the United Kingdom provides for reduced amounts of tax only on dividends received by individuals.<ref>{{cn}}</ref>


09 Feb 10, : Robin Hood Tax campaign launched. YouTube video html uses phrase "tiny tax on bank transactions …"
The company law of some jurisdictions prevents corporations from distributing amounts to shareholders except as distribution of earnings. Such earnings may be determined under company law principles or tax principles. For example, the United Kingdom permits a company to make dividend distributions only up to the balance of earnings available for distribution according to its last audited accounts.<ref>{{cn} to current version of s263-270 CA 85 </ref> In such jurisdictions, exceptions are usually provided with respect to distribution of shares of the company, for winding up, and in limited other situations.


09 Feb 10, 09:46: User:TomQTom posts redirect from RHT to Tobin tax. This user has no other edits before or since.
Other jurisdictions treat distributions as distributions of earnings taxable to shareholders if earnings are available to be distributed, but do not prohibit distributions in excess of earnings. For example, under the United States system each corporation must maintain a calculation of its earnings and profits (a tax concept similar to retained earnings).<ref>[http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000312----000-.html 26 USC 312].</ref> A distribution to a shareholder is considered to be from earnings and profits to the extent thereof unless an exception applies.<ref>[http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000316----000-.html 26 USC 316].</ref> Note that the United States provides reduced tax on dividend income of both corporations and individuals.


09 Feb 10, 09:30 (04:30 Toronto time): Toronto Star posts article by Linda McQuaig (an opinion columnist) on Robin Hood Tax, which omits any reference to Oxfam or any other sponsors. McQuaig in the article strongly supports the tax. Note: McQuaig's articles appear biweekly, and this was the biweekly article.
Other jurisdictions provide corporations a means of designating, within limits, whether a distribution is a distribution of earnings taxable to the shareholder or a return of capital. For example, in Canada a corporation may designate a distribution to shareholders as a distribution of Paid Up Capital (PUC), and thus not taxable as a dividend, to the extent of remaining capital, or an eligible dividend.<ref>{{cn}}</ref>


13 Feb 10: User:Boyd Reimer changes redirect on RHT to Financial transaction tax
===Example===
The following illustrates the dual level of tax concept:


14 Feb 10: User:Boyd Reimer creates article Volker Rule
C Corp earns 100 of profits before tax in each of years 1 and 2. It distributes all the earnings in year 3, when it has no profits. Jim owns all of C Corp. The tax rate in the residence jurisdiction of Jim and C Corp is 30%.
Year 1:
Taxable Income 100
Tax 30
Net After Tax 70
Jim's Income & Tax -0-
Year 2:
Taxable Income 100
Tax 30
Net After Tax 70
Jim's Income & Tax -0-
Cumulative Net 140
Year 3:
Distribution 140
Jim's Tax 42
Net After Jim's Tax 98
Total Tax Burden 102 on Pre-tax 200 = 51%


27 Feb 10: user:Boyd Reimer creates article Let Wall Street Pay for the Restoration of Main Street Act. Article moved to Let Wall Street Pay for the Restoration of Main Street Bill within 20 minutes by user:Ironholds (a non-admin who sometimes works amazingly fast: over 5 edits per minute!), stating "Bill, not Act, it hasn't been passed." User:Boyd Reimer made conforming changes within 30 minutes. Benwm later edits.
==Other corporate events==
Many systems provide that certain corporate events are not taxable to corporations or shareholders. Significant restrictions and special rules often apply. The rules related to such transactions are often quite complex.


9 Feb 10: RHT publicity campaign launched with release of video advertisement produced by a major film producer and staring a major UK television star. Within 24 hours there are links on all major web based advertising media. Google search for articles with catch phrase "tiny tax on banks" for the 4 day range 9 Feb to 12 Feb hits on Business Week, The Times, others, who ran articles on RHT quoting the same language as on RHT website.
===Formation===
Most systems treat the formation of a corporation by a controlling corporate shareholder as a nontaxable event. Many systems, including the United States and Canada, extend this tax free treatment to the formation of a corporation by any group of shareholders in control of the corporation.<ref>26 USC 351. For a discussion of U.S. principles, see Bittker & Eustice, below, Chapter 3.</ref> Generally, in tax free formations the tax attributes of assets and liabilities are transferred to the new corporation along with such assets and liabilities.


11 Feb 10: RHT website launches a "vote" on the tax. Within hours, the vote starts to skew sharply against for about an hour. Then within a very short time frame (barely hours) news reports appear that RHT campaign has traced the "attack" to Goldman Sachs. (This claim was made by RHT organization) The vote then skews sharply in favor of RHT.
Example: John and Mary are United States residents who operate a business. They decide to incorporate for business reasons. They transfer the assets of the business to Newco, a newly formed Delaware corporation of which they are the sole shareholders, subject to accrued liabilities of the business in exchange solely for common shares of Newco. Under United States principles, this transfer does not cause tax to John, Mary, or Newco. If on the other hand Newco also assumes a bank loan in excess of the basis of the assets transferred less the accrued liabilities, John and Mary will recognize taxable gain for such excess.<ref>[http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000357----000-.html 26 USC 357 and [http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2009/aprqtr/pdf/26cfr1.357-2.pdf 26 CFR 1.367-1(b) Example].</ref>


09 Feb 10 to 28 Feb 10: RHT article (just a redirect) is viewed 1247 times
===Acquisitions===
Corporations may merge or acquire other corporations in a manner a particular tax system treats as nontaxable to either of the corporations and/or to their shareholders. Generally, significant restrictions apply if tax free treatment is to be obtained.<ref>See, e.g., [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000368----000-.html 26 USC 368] defining events qualifying for reorganization treatment, including certain acquisitions.</ref> For example, Bigco acquires all of the shares of Smallco from Smallco shareholders in exchange solely for Bigco shares. This acquisition is not taxable to Smallco or its shareholders under U.S. or Canadian tax law if certain requirements are met, even if Smallco is then liquidated into or merged or amalgamated with Bigco.


1 Mar 10 to 17 Mar 10: RHT article is viewed 198 times (avg. 11/day)
===Reorganizations===
In addition, corporations may change key aspects of their legal identity, capitalization, or structure in a tax free manner under most systems. Examples of reorganizations that may be tax free include mergers, amalgamations, liquidations of subsidiaries, share for share exchanges, exchanges of shares for assets, changes in form or place of organization, and recapitalizations.<ref> See [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000354----000-.html 26 USC 354] for tax effect on shareholders of reorganizations as defined in [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000368----000-.html 26 USC 368].</ref>


18 Mar 10, 11:23-15:29: user:389melanie creates first draft of RHT article on user:talk page [user:389melanie/Robin Hood tax]. The article includes references to Financial transaction tax and Currency transaction tax while still on talk page. At 16:10, posts this as change to article. This is article's first non-redirect since creation. User:389melanie also adds cross reference to RHT article in article Financial transaction tax at 16:12, and continues edits of RHT until 17:09. Only one activity of this user thereafter, changing a date in an unrelated article. User:389melanie has no contributions after 18 March other than this one item. Original article as left by 389melanie was 5.1k. Article is viewed 74 times this day. (Note: per her [http://melaniesblog.usual.ca/?m=201003 blog] she was at Oxfam Live in Nottingham on 14 Mar 10.)
==Interest deduction limitations==
Most jurisdictions allow a [[tax deduction]] for interest expense incurred by a corporation in carrying out its trading activities. Where such interest is paid to related parties, such deduction may be limited. Without such limitation, owners could structure financing of the corporation in a manner that would provide for a tax deduction for much of the profits, potentially without changing the tax on shareholders. For example, assume a corporation earns profits of 100 before interest expense and would normally distribute 50 to shareholders. If the corporation is structured so that deductible interest of 50 is payable to the shareholders, it will cut its tax to half the amount due if it merely paid a dividend.


19 Mar 10, 13:56: user:FeydHuxtable expands article to 10.7k. Expansion includes citations to The Guardian, Reuters, The Financial Times. Two Guardian pieces are editorials, openly advocating for the RHT organization. The Financial Times cite does not refer to the tax, a Tobin tax, or the campaign, and predates the launch. The Reuters piece merely reports the publicity campaign launch, clearly quoting from a press release. The later Guardian pieces cover a U.S. Chamber of Commerce press release and the purported Goldman attack above. Article is viewed 75 times this day, and only 32 times the next day.
A common form of limitation is to limit the deduction for interest paid to related parties to interest charged at arm's length rates on debt not exceeding a certain portion of the equity of the paying corporation. For example, interest paid on related party debt in excess of three times equity may not be deductible in computing taxable income.


19 Mar 10, 14:52: user:Boyd Reimer creates article Halifax Initiative which includes the statement " On March 23, 1999, thanks to the Halifax Initiative work with Members of Parliament, members from all five political parties contributed to a vote which passed a private member motion on the Tobin tax." It lists as citation for support of the statement one sentence in the Canadian Parliament session report for 23 March 1999 (a 360 page document comprising 800k).
The United States, United Kingdom, and French tax systems apply a more complex set of tests to limit deductions. Under the U.S. system, related party interest expense in excess of 50% of cash flow is generally not currently deductible, with the excess potentially deductible in future years.<ref>[http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000163----000-.html 26 USC 163(j)].</ref>


19 Mar 10, 16:19: user:Boyd Reimer starts a [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard&oldid=350969217#Halifax_Initiative_in_the_Tobin_tax_article discussion] on Halifax Initiative and Tobin tax on whether Halifax Initiative or New Internationalist are reliable sources. This is joined within one hour by user:Arthur Rubin, an administrator.
The classification of instruments as debt on which interest is deductible or as equity with respect to which distributions are not deductible can be complex in some systems.<ref>See, e.g., [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000385----000-.html 26 USC 385]. The [[Internal Revenue Service]] had proposed complex regulations under this section (see TD 7747, 1981-1 CB 141) which were soon withdrawn (TD 7920, 1983-2 CB 69). An article in ''Tax Notes'', a publication of [[Tax Analysts]] in 1986 {{cn}} identified 26 factors the U.S. courts have used to classify instruments as debt or equity. Also see [http://asbbs.org/files/2008/PDF/E/Englebrecht.pdf article] by Englebrecht, ''et al''. </ref>


22 Mar 10: Anonymous user:193.133.69.201, which resolves to Oxfam UK, makes minor changes to RHT aggregating under 50 characters, and deletes one sentence. Article is viewed 75 times this day and 44-45 times each of next 2 days.
==Foreign corporation branches==
Most jurisdictions tax foreign corporations differently than domestic corporations.<ref>Contrast tax on domestic corporations under [ http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000011----000-.html 26 USC 11] and [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000063----000-.html 26 USC 63] with tax on foreign corporations under [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sup_01_26_10_A_20_1_30_N_40_II_50_B.html 26 USC 881-885].</ref> No international laws limit the ability of a country to tax its nationals and residents (individuals and entities). However, treaties and practicality impose limits on taxation of those outside its borders, even on income from sources within the country.


25 Mar 10: user:Beganlocal significantly expands article. Article is viewed 88 times this day, and under 55 times each of next 3 days.
Most jurisdictions tax foreign corporations on business income within the jurisdiction when earned through a branch or [[permanent establishment]] in the jurisdiction. This tax may be imposed at the same rate as the tax on business income of a resident corporation or at a different rate.<ref>See, e.g., 26 USC 882, ''supra''.</ref>


29 Mar 10, 11:25-14:21: user:Boyd Reimer edits article for style & organization. Article is viewed 177 times this day and 56 the next.
Upon payment of [[dividends]], corporations are generally subject to [[withholding tax]] only by their country of incorporation. Many countries impose a branch profits tax on foreign corporations to prevent the advantage the absence of dividend withholding tax would otherwise provide to foreign corporations. This tax may be imposed at the time profits are earned by the branch or at the time they are remitted or deemed remitted outside the country.<ref>See [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000884----000-.html 26 USC 884] for the latter approach.</ref>


29 Mar 10, 16:00-17:56: user:FeydHuxtable significantly expands article with materials primarily from the RHT website, including reports of the purported "attack".
Branches of foreign corporations may not be entitled to all of the same deductions as domestic corporations. Some jurisdictions do not recognize inter-branch payments as actual payments, and income or deductions arising from such inter-branch payments are disregarded.<ref>For example, the [[Internal Revenue Service]] states in its [http://www.irs.gov/publications/p515/ar02.html#en_US_publink1000224779 Publication 515], “The payee of a payment made to a disregarded entity is the owner of the entity.”</ref> Some jurisdictions impose express limits on tax deductions of branches. Commonly limited deductions include management fees and interest.


9 subsequent non-minor edits until my tagging on 10 Jun 10. Article is viewed 1324 times in April.
==Losses==
Most jurisdictions allow interperiod allocation or deduction of losses in some manner for corporations, even where such deduction is not allowed for individuals. A few jurisdictions allow losses (usually defined as negative taxable income) to be deducted by revising or amending prior year taxable income.<ref>See, e.g., [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000172----000-.html 26 USC 170](b)(2).</ref> Most jurisdictions allow such deductions only in subsequent periods. Some jurisdictions impose time limitations as to when loss deductions may be utilized.


It is clear that the 4 Boyd Reimer articles and Robin Hood tax article are part of an orchestrated, paid publicity campaign. I suggest the following articles & users be referred to administrators for investigation, with possible article reversions/deletions as appropriate.
==Groups of companies==
*Tobin tax
Several jurisdictions provide a mechanism whereby losses or [[tax credits] of one corporation may be used by another corporation where both corporations are commonly controlled (together, a group). In the United States and Netherlands, among others, this is accomplished by filing a single tax return including the income and loss of each group member. This is referred to as a consolidated return in the United States and as a fiscal unity in the Netherlands. In the United Kingdom, this is accomplished directly on a pairwise basis called group relief. Losses of one group member company may be “surrendered” to another group member company, and the latter company may deduct the loss against profits.
*Financial transaction tax
*Robin Hood tax
*Spahn tax
*Ox-Tales
*User:Boyd Reimer
*Now inactive users 389melanie, WWWords, Cosmic Cube


My apologies to all for this lengthy bit of sleuthing, but I felt it was needed to document this apparent violation of Wiki policies.
The United States has extensive regulations dealing with consolidated returns.<ref>[http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_09/26cfr1l_09.html 26 CFR 1.1502-0], ''et seq''.</ref> [One such rule requires matching of income and deductions on intercompany transactions within the group by use of “deferred intercompany transaction” rules.


:If you like sleuthing you may be interested in the [[WikiScanner]]. I haven't used it myself but others have found it illuminating. I have added the COI tag to the article until some resolution has been reached. There is nothing to stop you as a non-admin from queering this article on the [[Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard]]. Many (most?) of the pharmaceutical drugs here on WP appear to be straight adverts as well.--[[User:Aspro|Aspro]] ([[User talk:Aspro|talk]]) 10:47, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
In addition, a few systems provide a tax exemption for dividend income received by corporations. The Netherlands system provides a “participation exception” to taxation for corporations owning more than 25% of the dividend paying corporation.


:Hello Oldtaxguy,
==Transfer pricing==
A key issue in corporate tax is the setting of prices charged by related parties for goods, services, or the use of property. Many jurisdictions have guidelines on such prices which allow tax authorities to adjust prices charged. Such adjustments may apply in both an international and a domestic context. See [[Transfer pricing]].


:That is some impressive sleuthing. Thanks for your contribution. However, your sleuthing did not go far enough so I feel I should point out a few things:
==Taxation of Shareholders==
Most income tax systems levy tax on the corporation and, upon distribution of earnings (dividends), on the shareholder. This results in a dual level of tax. Most systems require that income tax be withheld on distribution of dividends to foreign shareholders, and some also require withholding of tax on distributions to domestic shareholders. The rate of such [[withholding tax]] may be reduced for a shareholder under a [[tax treaty]].


:1. I am not an inactive user.
Some systems tax some or all dividend income at lower rates than other income. The United States has historically provided a dividends received deduction to corporations with respect to dividends from other corporations in which the recipient owns more than 10% of the shares. For tax years 2004-2010, the United States also has imposed a reduced rate of taxation on dividends received by individuals.<ref>[http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000001----000-.html 26 USC 1(h)(11)]. Note that distributions from an [[S Corporation]], Regulated Investment Company (mutual fund), or Real Estate Investment Trust are not treated as dividends.</ref>
:2. I am not a representative of Oxfam or any other activist group.
:3. The bulk of my contributions have been to improve articles through judicious editing and reorganization, eliminating unreliable sources, and counteracting blatant attempts to use Wikipedia as an advertising platform (my last edit on the Tobin tax article was to enforce Wikipedia policies regarding this). Please read the archived discussion page from the Tobin tax article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Tobin_tax/Archive_4) for some further insight into my efforts.


:In short, I have gone out of my way in attempting to bring the articles I have worked on up to encyclopedic standards (although the Tobin tax article, admittedly, still needs a lot of work) while respecting and enforcing Wikipedia policies. I do not appreciate having my efforts disparaged by your insinuations.
Some systems currently attempt or in the past have attempted to integrate taxation of the corporation with taxation of shareholders to mitigate the dual level of taxation. As a current example, Australia provides for a “franking credit” as a benefit to shareholders. When an Australian company pays a dividend to a domestic shareholder, it reports the dividend as well as a notional tax credit amount. The shareholder utilizes this notional credit to offset shareholder level income tax.<ref>{{cn}}</ref>


:In the future, please carry out your sleuthing to its logical end before making conclusions regarding the motivations of any other editor. Even then you should be really careful: [[WP:NPA]]. In particular, make note of "Accusations about personal behavior that lack evidence. Serious accusations require serious evidence."
A previous system was utilised in the United Kingdom, called the [[Advance Corporation Tax]] (ACT). When a company paid a dividend, it was required to pay an amount of ACT, which it then used to offset its own taxes. The ACT was included in income by the shareholder resident in the United Kingdom or certain treaty countries, and treated as a payment of tax by the shareholder. To the extent that deemed tax payment exceeded taxes otherwise due, it was refundable to the shareholder.


:Incidentally, if you want to see a real example of collusion among activists / supporters then look at the comment from [[User:FeydHuxtable|FeydHuxtable]] to [[User:389melanie|389melanie]] on the latter's talk page:
==Alternative tax bases==
Many jurisdictions incorporate some sort of alternative tax computation. These computations may be based on assets, capital, wages, or some alternative measure of taxable income. Often the alternative tax functions as a minimum tax.


:<blockquote>"Hi, just wanted to apologise in case youre still watching the Robin Hood Tax article you created and feel Ive gone overboard in compromising with the objectors. Your original article was very well written and informative, but it didnt meet all our guidelines, mainly as it was sourced largely to the robin hood site itself rather than secondary sources like independent news papers. The campaign has lost much of its high level support for now, and it looks like opinion among decision makers has generally swung in a deflationary direction. But this cannot possibly last for more than 3 – 4 years considering the massive levels of public debt and the increasing ineffectiveness of anti progressive propaganda. When events swing back in a pleasing direction they'll move with some force. Keep the faith! [[User:FeydHuxtable|FeydHuxtable]] ([[User talk:FeydHuxtable|talk]]) 16:38, 14 June 2010 (UTC)"</blockquote>
United States federal income tax incorporates an alternative minimum tax. This tax is computed at a lower tax rate (20% for corporations), and imposed based on a modified version of taxable income. Modifications include longer depreciation lives assets under [[MACRS]], adjustments related to costs of developing natural resources, and an addback of certain tax exempt interest. The U. S. state of Michigan previously taxed businesses on an alternative base that did not allow compensation of employees as a tax deduction and allowed full deduction of the cost of production assets upon acquisition.
:[[User:Cosmic Cube|Cosmic Cube]] ([[User talk:Cosmic Cube|talk]]) 02:02, 24 June 2010 (UTC)


== AMT collaboration ==
Some jurisdictions, such as Swiss cantons and certain states within the United States, impose taxes based on capital. These may be based on total equity per audited financial statements<ref>Switzerland {{cn}}</ref>, a computed amount of assets less liabilities<ref>New York</ref> or quantity of shares outstanding<ref>Delaware</ref>. In some jurisdictions, capital based taxes are imposed in addition to the income tax.<ref>New York</ref> In other jurisdictions, the capital taxes function as alternative taxes.


Thanks for the excellent suggestions. I've been too busy lately with life outside of Wikipedia to take on that article. I think your outline is right on with some allowance for going into more detail than one might see in a traditional media article on the topic. Wikipedia can permit more elaboration since it's not constrained by fixed pages (unlike traditional encyclopedias).
Mexico imposes an alternative tax on corporations, the IETU.<ref>{{cn}}</ref> The tax rate is lower than the regular rate, and there are adjustments for salaries and wages, interest and royalties, and depreciable assets.


I will hazard a guess that you know a lot more about tax issue than I do. In addition to helping make things more english, I can work on the wiki-markup around citation etc.
==Tax returns==
Most systems require that corporations file an annual income tax return.<ref>See, e.g., [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00006012----000-.html 26 USC 6012(a)(2)].</ref> Some systems (such as the Canadian and United States systems) require that taxpayers self assess tax on the tax return.<ref>See, e.g., [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00006151----000-.html 26 USC 6151].</ref> Other systems provide that the government must make an assessment for tax to be due.<ref>{{cn}}</ref> Some systems require certification of tax returns in some manner by accountants licensed to practice in the jurisdiction, often the company's auditors.<ref>See, e.g., India {{cn}}</ref>


We could collaborate using a sub-page on your or my user name. I've seen that you've used your talk page for exactly that, but it's easy to create another page under a user name that's not for discussion topics.
Tax returns can be fairly simple or quite complex. The systems requiring simple returns often base taxable income on financial statement profits with few adjustments, and may require that audited financial statements be attached to the return.<ref>See, e.g., UK Form [http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/ctsa/ct600-2008.pdf CT600], which [http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/ct/managing/company-tax-return/returns/submit.htm requires the attachment] of audited or statutory accounts as filed with the [[Companies House]].</ref> Returns for such systems generally require that the relevant financial statements be attached to a simple adjustment schedule. By contrast, United States corporate tax returns require both computation of taxable income from components thereof and reconciliation of taxable income to financial statement income.


If you like, i can create one under my name and we can go to town on improving this important, but currently impenetrable article.[[User:Mattnad|Mattnad]] ([[User talk:Mattnad|talk]]) 21:24, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Many systems require forms or schedules supporting particular items on the main form. Some of these schedules may be incorporated into the main form. For example, the Canadian corporate return, [http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pbg/tf/t2/t2-09e.pdf Form T-2], an 8 page form, incorporates some detail schedules but has nearly 50 additional schedules that may be required.
: Yep, the subsection looks good. One other thought, high level, is renaming the article to "Alternative Minimum Tax (Individual)" so we can focus the article, without apology, on the personal income tax.[[User:Mattnad|Mattnad]] ([[User talk:Mattnad|talk]]) 15:13, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
::If you haven't come across this recent tool created by the tax foundation, it will be a very useful EL. I'll add it now to the article: [http://www.mytaxburden.org/]. It's the first time I've seen such a straight forward way of helping people see if they are hit by the AMT, both in the current tax law and guesses about the future.
:::Caution with that site: it's a long time lobbying site that has no problems misrepresenting things to support their agenda. Better tools for seeing what your tax is at present are at H&R Block, TurboTax, dinkytown.net, and a few others. H&R & TT are both tax software providers with excellent software and online programs. I use a more complex one from CCH (VERY not recommended for average user). I know Tax Foundation has a lot of supporters on Wikipedia, but I've found them to be highly biased and unreliable.


== Tax ==
Some systems have different returns for different types of corporations or corporations engaged in specialized businesses. The United States has 13 variations on the basic [http://www.irs.gov/app/picklist/list/formsInstructions.html?value=1120&criteria=formNumber&submitSearch=Find Form 1120] for [[S Corporations]], insurance companies, [[Domestic International Sales Corporations]], foreign corporations, and other entities. The structure of the forms and imbedded schedules vary by type of form.


Thanks for your help at [[Tax]], it's very much needed. (Your rewrite to the corporate tax section was good; unfortunately most sections need just as much work!)
Preparation of non-simple corporate tax returns can be time consuming. For example, the U.S. [[Internal Revenue Service]] states in the [http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i1120.pdf instructions for Form 1120] that the average time needed to complete form is over 56 hours, not including record keeping time and required attachments.


As for the expatriation tax, I don't think your reference suffices for the section as written. It says
Tax return due dates vary by jurisdiction, fiscal or tax year, and type of entity.<ref>Examples: U.S. corporations must file Federal income Form 1120 by the 15th day of the third month following the end of the tax year (March 15 for calendar years); but Form 1120-IC-DISC returns are not due until the 15th day of the ninth month; Canadian corporations must file T-2 by June 30.</ref> In self assessment systems, payment of taxes is generally due no later than the normal due date, though advance tax payments may be required.<ref>U.S. Corporations must pay estimated taxes for each quarter or face penalties under [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00006655----000-.html 26 USC 6655]. Canadian corporations must pay estimated taxes [http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/bsnss/tpcs/crprtns/pymnts/nstlmnts/ddts-eng.html monthly]. In each case, final payment is due with the corporation tax return.
: The most significant Expatriation Tax is one found in the USA.
and your reference gives details of the US expatriation tax, but no comparisons to other such taxes.


Do you think this sentence should stay? If so, any ideas for properly referencing it?
==Further reading==
U.S.: Bittker, Boris I. and Eustice, James S.: ''Federal Income Taxation of Corporations and Shareholders'': paperback ISBN 978-0791341018, [[http://ria.thomsonreuters.com/EStore/detail.aspx?ID=WFCS subscription service]]


[[User:CRGreathouse|CRGreathouse]]<small> ([[User talk:CRGreathouse|t]] | [[Special:Contributions/CRGreathouse|c]])</small> 14:47, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Kahn & Lehman. Corporate Income Taxation


::Unfortunately, I don't have enough experience in expatriation in other than the U.S. to comment on the sentence. So I left it as I found it. I think Canada at one time (maybe still) had a deemed sale provision, but I can't remember the details. I don't have a problem with deleting the "most significant" clause and merely using the U.S. as an example. I also think using the reference to a particular modifying act is really appropriate, especially since it has since been further changed (and the later changes were more significant). Perhaps the sentences would be better as "For example, under the United States provision, any individual who ..." Always happy to hear ideas of others. Note that I'm slowly working on various enhancements in the tax area, especially U.S. [[User:Oldtaxguy|Oldtaxguy]] ([[User talk:Oldtaxguy#top|talk]]) 03:05, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
==External Links==
*Canada
**[http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/menu-eng.html CRA main website]
**[http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/bsnss/tpcs/crprtns/rtrn/menu-eng.html CRA gateway to T2 returns]
*United Kingdom
**[http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/index.htm HMRC main website]
**[http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/ct/getting-started/intro.htm HMRC Introduction to Corporation Tax]
*United States
**[http://www.irs.gov/ IRS main website]
**[http://www.irs.gov/businesses/corporations/index.html IRS gateway for corporations]
**[http://www.irs.gov/publications/p542/index.html IRS Publication 542, Corporations]


::: OK, I think I'll make those changes. Good luck with the other tax articles -- many that I've seen are in sad shape, so you'll have your work cut out for you.
==References==
::: [[User:CRGreathouse|CRGreathouse]]<small> ([[User talk:CRGreathouse|t]] | [[Special:Contributions/CRGreathouse|c]])</small> 18:12, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
{{Reflinst|2}}


==Overlinking in introductions==
~~~~

I think you're right, I've moved the links that I added to [[Alternative Minimum Tax]] out of the introduction. [[User:Edward|Edward]] ([[User talk:Edward|talk]]) 05:01, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

== Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot ==
removed after action [[User:Oldtaxguy|Oldtaxguy]] ([[User talk:Oldtaxguy#top|talk]]) 20:56, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
[[User:SuggestBot|SuggestBot]] predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

== Taxation article ==

I really, really like the layout you suggested. Nicely lays things out and suggests good areas for helpful sub-articles to keep the length somewhat reasonable. I can't really offer to help as my time sucks, but where I can, I'll help. Bad thing to say, but would rather say something than compliment without saying anything about helping one way or the other. :( [[User:Ravensfire|<b style="color:darkred;">Ravensfire</b>]] ([[User talk:Ravensfire|<span style="color:black;">talk</span>]]) 21:36, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

:While my time is limited nowadays on Wikipedia, I'll do what I can to help out if we're going to focus on a particular article. Your layout on [[Taxation in the United States]] looks like a good structure to me. We may need to adjust the headings a bit to better line up with [[WP:HEAD]], as Headings should not explicitly refer to the subject of the article, or to higher-level headings, unless doing so is shorter or clearer. This may be a case where such is clearer, but we'll need to consider that since it has a bit of duplication. [[User:Morphh|<span style="color:green">Morphh</span>]] <sup>[[user talk:Morphh|<span style="color:chocolate">(talk)</span>]]</sup> <small><i>16:49, 15 December 2010 (UTC)</i></small>

== Prod of [[Federal taxation in the United States]] ==

I agree with the redirect/merge of [[Federal taxation in the United States]] but don't think [[WP:Proposed deletion|Proposed deletion]] is the right way to handle it. If you're only redirecting, I think the talk page discussion is sufficient. If you want to discuss it as a potentially controversial deletion, it would be better to use [[WP:Articles for deletion|Articles for deletion]] instead. --[[User:Pnm|Pnm]] ([[User talk:Pnm|talk]]) 05:44, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

== Taxation in the US rewrite ==

I've created stubs for all redlinks on [[User:Ravensfire/Taxation in the United States|the main article in my userspace]]. Thanks for your response on the idea behind the rewrite, btw. It's enough of a shift that I'm still having some issues getting my head totally around it. It will get there though. I'm going to try to get some more done this week - kinda depends on how crazy work gets. [[User:Ravensfire|<b style="color:darkred;">Ravensfire</b>]] ([[User talk:Ravensfire|<span style="color:black;">talk</span>]]) 17:44, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

== Thanks for the tip ==

Thank you for pointing out your objection with my marking of a minor edit. I really did need to review the guidelines.

[[User:Teimu.tm|Teimu.tm]] ([[User talk:Teimu.tm|talk]]) 05:46, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

== Re: Use of minor edit flag ==

According to the history, I have never edited the article [[Tax Day]]. Could you please link me to the actual edit diff? —[[User:Keenan Pepper|Keenan Pepper]] 16:56, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

:Wow, I must be going crazy. I was sure I got a message about it, but you must be right because you never edited my talk page. Sorry for the confusion! —[[User:Keenan Pepper|Keenan Pepper]] 07:42, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

==[[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|Proposed deletion]] of [[Importer of record]]==
[[Image:Ambox warning yellow.svg|left|link=|48px|]]

The article [[Importer of record]] has been [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|proposed for deletion]]&#32; because of the following concern:
:'''A dictionary definition per [[WP:NOT#DICT]]. Suggest transwiki to wikitionary unless someone has a suitable merge/redirect target.'''

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be [[WP:DEL#REASON|deleted for any of several reasons]].

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your [[Help:edit summary|edit summary]] or on [[Talk:Importer of record|the article's talk page]].

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|proposed deletion process]], but other [[Wikipedia:deletion process|deletion process]]es exist. The [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion|speedy deletion]] process can result in deletion without discussion, and [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion|articles for deletion]] allows discussion to reach [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] for deletion.<!-- Template:PRODWarning --> [[User:Zachlipton|Zachlipton]] ([[User talk:Zachlipton|talk]]) 04:22, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Deletion in WP is fine. Thanks. I added to Wiktionary. [[User:Oldtaxguy|Oldtaxguy]] ([[User talk:Oldtaxguy#top|talk]]) 04:33, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
== Pirating of Wikipedia content for profit ==

The following appeared in the Barnes & Noble online site:
Income Tax In The United States by Frederic P. Miller (Editor), Agnes F. Vandome (Editor), John McBrewster (Editor)
Product Details
* Pub. Date: October 2010
* Publisher: VDM Publishing House Ltd.
* Format: Paperback , 172pp

* ISBN-13: 9786132897756
* ISBN: 6132897755
Synopsis

High Quality Content by WIKIPEDIA articles! The federal government of the United States imposes a progressive tax on the taxable income of individuals, partnerships, companies, corporations, trusts, decedents' estates, and certain bankruptcy estates. Some state and municipal governmentsalso impose income taxes. The first Federal income tax was imposed (under Article I, section 8, clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution) during the Civil War, then again in the 1890s, and again after the Sixteenth Amendment was ratified in 1913. Current income taxes are imposed under these constitutional provisions and various sections of Subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, including 26 U.S.C. § 1 (imposing income tax on the taxable income of individuals, estates and trusts) and 26 U.S.C. 11 (imposing income tax on the taxable income of corporations).

===Also===
Excise Tax in the United States by Frederic P. Miller (Editor), Agnes F. Vandome (Editor), John McBrewster (Editor)
Product Details

* Pub. Date: September 2010
* Publisher: VDM Publishing House Ltd.
* Format: Paperback , 78pp

* ISBN-13: 9786132791429
* ISBN: 6132791426

Synopsis

High Quality Content by WIKIPEDIA articles! Excise tax, sometimes called an excise duty, is a type of tax. In the United States, the term "excise" means: (A) any tax other than a property tax or capitation (i.e., an indirect tax, or excise, in the constitutional law sense), or (B) a tax that is simply called an excise in the language of the statute imposing that tax (an excise in the statutory law sense). An excise under definition (A) is not necessarily the same as an excise under definition (B). Excise taxes are often seen as a tax on items like gasoline, tobacco and alcohol (sometimes referred to as sin taxes). The tax is usually a flat amount for a certain quantity of the item (for example, the state of Pennsylvania charges $1.60 for a pack of 20 cigarettes, which is on top of the federal cigarette excise of $1.01).

: Frustrating, isn't it? There are more than a few publishers that do this, actually. I can't remember off the top of my head, but I've seen several mentioned on various policy pages after people spot them on Amazon. So the big question is really is this legal? If done right, it probably is. The CC-BY-SA 3.0 license and WP's own [http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Terms_of_Use Terms of Use] allow this if the work is attributed correctly. I usually just laugh it off and point to the stupidity of people. Why would someone willingly pay ANYTHING for something I can get for free? Especially when most of the articles are summaries and you're going to need to go to the sources for more details!

: The publishers that don't follow the license do piss me off. They try to pass off someone else's work as their own, and that's just BS. Those you bring to the Foundation's attention and let them hammer away. It's part of their purpose after all. [[User:Ravensfire|<b style="color:darkred;">Ravensfire</b>]] ([[User talk:Ravensfire|<span style="color:black;">talk</span>]]) 16:45, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

:<nowiki></nowiki>
: [[IANAL]].
: The real question is whether they are licensing the content properly. If not, and you contributed materials, then you may have 17 USC § 106 rights and § 501-505 remedies. (No comment on § 506.)
: But if they have followed the terms of either the GFDL or CC-BY-SA then they're pretty much within their rights. Wikipedia explicitly permits for-profit uses of its materials, provided certain formalities are used.
: [[User:CRGreathouse|CRGreathouse]]<small> ([[User talk:CRGreathouse|t]] | [[Special:Contributions/CRGreathouse|c]])</small> 17:10, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

== Barnstar ==

{| style="border: 1px solid {{{border|gray}}}; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}};"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | {{#ifeq:{{{2}}}|alt|[[Image:Original Barnstar Hires.png|100px]]|[[Image:Original_Barnstar.png|100px]]}}
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''Tax-deductible Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | I [[User:Morphh|Morphh]] award you this [[Tax deduction|tax-deductible]] Barnstar for your [[tax]] related contributions and involvement in [[WP:TAX|WikiProject Taxation]].
|}

==Copyright problems with [[:United States tax law and social policy]]==
[[Image:Copyright-problem.svg|left|48px|alt=|link=]]Hello. Concerning your contribution, [[:United States tax law and social policy]], please note that Wikipedia cannot accept [[Wikipedia:Copyrights|copyrighted]] text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from https://patriottaxsolutions.com/blog/the-federal-tax-law/. As a copyright violation, [[:United States tax law and social policy]] appears to qualify for [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|deletion]] under the [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion|speedy deletion criteria]]. [[:United States tax law and social policy]] has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.
If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the ''[[Creative Commons licenses|Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License]]'' (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:

:*If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at [[Talk:United States tax law and social policy]] and send an email with the message to {{NoSpamEmail|permissions-en|wikimedia.org}}. '''See [[Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission]] for instructions.'''
:*If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at [[Talk:United States tax law and social policy]] with a link to where we can find that note.
:*If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to {{NoSpamEmail|permissions-en|wikimedia.org}} ''or'' a postal message to the [[wmf:Contact_us|Wikimedia Foundation]] permitting re-use ''under the [[Creative Commons licenses|CC-BY-SA]] and [[GNU Free Documentation License|GFDL]]'', and note that you have done so on [[Talk:United States tax law and social policy]].

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While contributions are appreciated, Wikipedia must require all contributors to understand and comply with its [[Wikipedia:Copyrights|copyright policy]]. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators '''will''' be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing. Thank you. <!-- Inserted via Template:Nothanks-sd --> [[User:De728631|De728631]] ([[User talk:De728631|talk]]) 19:27, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
:I just saw that you've taken the texts from [[Taxation in the United States]] which has apparently been the source for that blog entry, given the date in the blog is younger than our Wikipedia text. So I'm not quite sure about the copyright status. Going to ask some admins. [[User:De728631|De728631]] ([[User talk:De728631|talk]]) 19:34, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
::If the WP article is copyright infringement, then it should be deleted. Left you a note. [[User:Oldtaxguy|Oldtaxguy]] ([[User talk:Oldtaxguy#top|talk]]) 19:37, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
::I've put it up for review at [[Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2011 March 13]] but as I said it looks like we've got the older rights here. [[User:De728631|De728631]] ([[User talk:De728631|talk]]) 19:43, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

== CFR links ==

As your [[User talk:Arthur Rubin#CFR links not current|request for my help in fixing the CFR links]] is about to be archived, I wanted to remind you to reply with the actual URL format, to see if I can rewrite the template to match it. — [[User:Arthur Rubin|Arthur Rubin]] [[User talk:Arthur Rubin|(talk)]] 23:03, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

== Section 179 depreciation deduction ==

Hi. I saw your comments on the talk page for [[Section 179 depreciation deduction ]] from last December. I'm trying to find out the specifications and restrictions of this deduction for 2012, but the article itself does not contain any 2012 relevant sections, most are for dates as far back as 2004. You seem very knowledgeable about this subject, so I was wondering if you could update the article with current data. If not or if you're too busy that's cool, I hope there's no harm asking. Thanks! --[[User:Captain Infinity|Captain Infinity]] ([[User talk:Captain Infinity|talk]]) 15:32, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
:Done. Good suggestion. [[User:Oldtaxguy|Oldtaxguy]] ([[User talk:Oldtaxguy#top|talk]]) 20:49, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
:: Thanks! --[[User:Captain Infinity|Captain Infinity]] ([[User talk:Captain Infinity|talk]]) 22:38, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

== Just to let you know ==

You have been mentioned at [[Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians]] [[User:Ottawahitech|Ottawahitech]] ([[User talk:Ottawahitech|talk]]) 02:18, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

==Disambiguation link notification for August 29==

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited [[Income tax]], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page [[Social Security]] ([[tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Income_tax|check to confirm]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;[[tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Income_tax|fix with Dab solver]]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the [[User:DPL bot/Dablink notification FAQ|FAQ]]{{*}} Join us at the [[Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links|DPL WikiProject]].</small>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these [[User:DPL bot|opt-out instructions]]. Thanks, [[User:DPL bot|DPL bot]] ([[User talk:DPL bot|talk]]) 11:14, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

== [[WP:ACE2015|ArbCom elections are now open!]] ==

{{Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/MassMessage}} [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 14:14, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692221704 -->

== Request for expert attention ==

Hi. I found you via [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Directory/Description/WikiProject Taxation]], and hope you might take a look at [[Florida state Unemployment Tax]]. I was just hopping through [[Special:Random]] and was about to fix the formatting of the first citation, but noticed that it didn't seem to add up.&nbsp;[[User:Fred_Gandt|'''<span style="font-family:arial;color:#055;font-size:16px;">f<i style="color:#0dd;font-size:10px;">red</i>g<i style="color:#0dd;font-size:10px;">andt</i></span>''']] 22:35, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
:I have proposed the subject article for deletion. See discussion in the talk section of that article.[[User:Oldtaxguy|Oldtaxguy]] ([[User talk:Oldtaxguy#top|talk]]) 22:52, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
::Thanks :-)&nbsp;[[User_talk:Fred_Gandt|<b style='font:1rem Arial;color:#066;text-decoration:inherit;'>f<i style='font-size:.7em;color:#0bb;'>red</i>g<i style='font-size:.7em;color:#0bb;'>andt</i></b>]] 01:25, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

== Your [[WP:Good articles|GA]] nomination of [[Income tax in the United States]]==
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article [[Income tax in the United States]] you nominated for [[WP:GA|GA]]-status according to the [[WP:WIAGA|criteria]]. [[Image:Time2wait.svg|20px]] This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. <!-- Template:GANotice --> <small>Message delivered by [[User:Legobot|Legobot]], on behalf of [[User:Cryptic C62|Cryptic C62]]</small> -- [[User:Cryptic C62|Cryptic C62]] ([[User talk:Cryptic C62|talk]]) 01:40, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

== Your [[WP:Good articles|GA]] nomination of [[Income tax in the United States]]==
The article [[Income tax in the United States]] you nominated as a [[Wikipedia:Good article nominations|good article]] has failed [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|20px]]; see [[Talk:Income tax in the United States]] for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. <!-- Template:GANotice result=fail --> <small>Message delivered by [[User:Legobot|Legobot]], on behalf of [[User:Cryptic C62|Cryptic C62]]</small> -- [[User:Cryptic C62|Cryptic C62]] ([[User talk:Cryptic C62|talk]]) 00:21, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

== [[WP:ACE2016|ArbCom Elections 2016]]: Voting now open! ==

{{Ivmbox|Hello, Oldtaxguy. Voting in the '''[[WP:ACE2016|2016 Arbitration Committee elections]]''' is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The [[WP:ARBCOM|Arbitration Committee]] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration|Wikipedia arbitration process]]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose [[WP:BAN|site bans]], [[WP:TBAN|topic bans]], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy|arbitration policy]] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2016/Candidates|the candidates' statements]] and submit your choices on '''[[Special:SecurePoll/vote/399|the voting page]]'''. [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
|Scale of justice 2.svg|imagesize=40px}}
<!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52 bot@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User:Mdann52_bot/spamlist/38&oldid=750775231 -->

Latest revision as of 15:12, 10 August 2021

Tax deduction article has been posted. Corporate tax article has been posted. Oldtaxguy (talk) 19:54, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Corporate tax in the United States article enhancements posted.Oldtaxguy (talk) 19:36, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tax credit article posted June 6.Oldtaxguy (talk) 02:59, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Advertising

[edit]

I was not advertising the dude I was doing a project for school never met the guy in my life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crog18 (talk • contribs) 20:25, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

John Battelle

[edit]

How does it sound like a advertisement?

Robin Hood Tax

[edit]

Hello Oldtaxguy and welcome to Wikipedia. As a new editor its fair enough if youre not aware of this, but when you canvassed Arthur Rubin and Framspear for support you were going against several guidelines we have here, specifically WP:AGF , WP:Battle and WP:Canvassing. Here on Wikipedia we're supposed to be non adversarial where possible. A good way to collaborate with others is to always assume good faith, as least as your initial default position. Some editors are atheists while some are evangelical Christians, some are libertarians while some are socialists, but most are united in wanting to build a quality encyclopaedia. Our WP:NPOV policy helps us all work together to create fair and accurate articles, essentially by ensuring different points of view on a topic are presented in accordance with their weighting in quality sources. So much as I respect someone who is willing to fight for what they believe in , in future please avoid assumeing editors with a different POV are lobbyists and please avoid asking editors for help in "battleing" others - at least untill youre sure they really are up for a battle. That said, I hope you continue to contribute and enjoy editing! FeydHuxtable (talk) 16:33, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you have answers

[edit]

Hi Oldtaxguy, you have answers waiting for you at the help desk. Cheers. ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ ―Œ ♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣ 04:03, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Robin Hood tax & Oxfam: chronology

[edit]

I would like to publicly apologize to FeydHuxtable if he is not actively connected with Oxfam or the RHT publicity campaign. In such case, my comments were inappropriately directed to him, for which I am genuinely sorry. Please forgive my over enthusiasm for a cause (Wikipedia integrity) in which I believe.

I have no opinion on the RHT or similar taxes. I do have a strong opinion that Wikipedia should not be used as an advertising platform, and believe it has been with respect to this article and others indicated below. There surely have been those who, thru their own enthusiasm, have unwittingly participated in this advertising in good faith attempts to enhance Wikipedia as an encyclopedia. I do not intend to cast aspersions on any of them.

A brief history of this article and 3 related articles should help illustrate the advertising problem. It appears that the RHT and 3 other articles were created by Oxfam and its affiliates to promote its advertising campaign. The following, where there are not in-line references, is culled from contribution and article histories on Wikipedia itself. The history before 9 Feb 10 is, I think, very relevant to the trail.

2001: War On Want and New Economics Foundation publish a position paper entitled "The Robin Hood Tax" advocating that a Tobin tax be levied by a new international "Global Development Commission" with authority to require nations to levy the tax, which would be remitted to such commission for global "development" projects.

4 Sep 09: Oxfam issues "Oxfam International G20 Media Briefing" calling for "a Currency Transaction Tax (CTT) of at least 0.005% on international currency transactions".

27 Oct 09: user:389melanie account is created. This user creates & re-edits Wiki article [Ox-Tales] on books released by Oxfam in July 09. The article is first created on the userpage and then posted as a Wiki article. User:389melanie edits this and several Oxfam related articles (and nothing else) through 1 Dec. In her blog in a post titled Ox Tales on 28 Oct she states " I’ve now been interning for Oxfam for 3 weeks … The other completely awesome thing I’m doing is learning to use Wikipedia, so that I can write articles and edit the Oxfam related pages." On 14 Oct she stated " Just got back from Oxford, having spend 3 days there starting my new job and meeting the lady I’ll be staying with while I’m there." (Note: the web site hosting her blog describes themselves this way: " The Usual Company is a small firm located in Toronto Canada servicing businesses in the GTA with some recent interest in the UK. Projects are well planned, scheduled to your fast paced needs, and closely monitored through the life of the contract. We pride ourselves on client relations and open communication.")

5 Nov 09: head of Oxfam UK makes a statement to some number of members of the press proposing a financial transaction tax, first using the key phrase "a tiny tax on banks". Note: this phrase is repeated throughout the RHT publicity campaign and on the RHT web site.

7 Dec 09: user:389melanie posts a request on Wiki Helpdesk "Hi there, I'm trying to get together a small group of people to try and improve the information about Oxfam on Wikipedia…"

19 Dec 09: 389melanie arrives in Toronto per her blog

21 Dec 09: user:Boyd Reimer begins series of edits to article Tobin tax. This is this editor's first edit to any tax article. Edits occur every few minutes from 15:57 to 18:03. More edits to this article on 21, 24, 25 and 29 Dec. On 30 Dec 09 through 4 Jan 10, user edits article numerous times fairly continuously throughout each day. From 21 Dec to 4 Jan, the article is expanded from 18k to 110k. Note: an anonymous user in Poland removed 7 blatant advertisements for Halifax Initiative, a group closely associated with Oxfam.

Note: a real person named Boyd M L Reimer is a freelance web designer and developer in Toronto. His Flikr slogan is "Results online don't just happen. They're planned." Also Note: of the 17 listed members of Halifax Initiative (an organization purportedly in Canada) members except Oxfam, 3 labor unions, and 1 other (i.e., 12 of 17) have anonymously hosted websites. The initiative's website is also anonymously hosted.

23-24 Dec 09: user:Benwm edits Tobin tax article. This editor then and subsequently provided about 125 edits of Tobin tax and Financial transaction tax (see below), 14 other edits of related articles, and no other activity. All this editors edits were shortly following Boyd Reimer edits of those articles.

1 Jan 10: user:WWWords created. This user edited only the Tobin tax article. Last edit 4 March 10.

3 Jan 10: anonymous user:78.33.152.244 in UK adds German text from an interview of Tobin from Die Spiegel and makes certain other minor edits over 10 minutes. Reimer edits pause during this, and 15 minutes later he edits around the newly added German text with description "I created a new section and moved existing material to the new section without changing it."

4 Jan 10: user:Boyd Reimer creates article Financial transaction tax and does multiple edits through

4 Jan 10 through 10 March 10: users Boyd Reimer, Benwm, Cosmic Cube, and WWWords perform multiple, frequent edits to Tobin tax article, with almost no participation by other users. (1 anonymous user complained of NPOV and OR)

13 Jan 10: user:Boyd Reimer creates article Currency transaction tax. This article was edited by him alone through 27 Jan, then by him and Cosmic Cube, with 6 other edits through 26 Feb by 2 anonymous users, one of whom resolves to a privacy service in Romania and the other is the same one who complained in Tobin tax about NPOV, and a minor edit by another user.

13 Jan 10: user:Boyd Reimer creates article Spahn tax. This article was edited by him alone through 27 Jan, then by him and Cosmic Cube as only editors changing more than 20 characters.

22 Jan 10: BBC item on RHT states that "Some of the world's top A-listers are to call for a new tax on banks only days after announcing near record profits and bonuses. The celebrities - none of whom have yet been formally confirmed - are set to front a worldwide campaign…" and "Film-maker Richard Curtis is the man behind the celebrity campaign"

27 Jan 10: user:Cosmic Cube created. This user edited only the Tobin tax, Currency transaction tax and Spahn tax articles (see below).

06 Feb 10: YouTube user Robin Hood Tax created by robinhoodtax.org

09 Feb 10, : Robin Hood Tax campaign launched. YouTube video html uses phrase "tiny tax on bank transactions …"

09 Feb 10, 09:46: User:TomQTom posts redirect from RHT to Tobin tax. This user has no other edits before or since.

09 Feb 10, 09:30 (04:30 Toronto time): Toronto Star posts article by Linda McQuaig (an opinion columnist) on Robin Hood Tax, which omits any reference to Oxfam or any other sponsors. McQuaig in the article strongly supports the tax. Note: McQuaig's articles appear biweekly, and this was the biweekly article.

13 Feb 10: User:Boyd Reimer changes redirect on RHT to Financial transaction tax

14 Feb 10: User:Boyd Reimer creates article Volker Rule

27 Feb 10: user:Boyd Reimer creates article Let Wall Street Pay for the Restoration of Main Street Act. Article moved to Let Wall Street Pay for the Restoration of Main Street Bill within 20 minutes by user:Ironholds (a non-admin who sometimes works amazingly fast: over 5 edits per minute!), stating "Bill, not Act, it hasn't been passed." User:Boyd Reimer made conforming changes within 30 minutes. Benwm later edits.

9 Feb 10: RHT publicity campaign launched with release of video advertisement produced by a major film producer and staring a major UK television star. Within 24 hours there are links on all major web based advertising media. Google search for articles with catch phrase "tiny tax on banks" for the 4 day range 9 Feb to 12 Feb hits on Business Week, The Times, others, who ran articles on RHT quoting the same language as on RHT website.

11 Feb 10: RHT website launches a "vote" on the tax. Within hours, the vote starts to skew sharply against for about an hour. Then within a very short time frame (barely hours) news reports appear that RHT campaign has traced the "attack" to Goldman Sachs. (This claim was made by RHT organization) The vote then skews sharply in favor of RHT.

09 Feb 10 to 28 Feb 10: RHT article (just a redirect) is viewed 1247 times

1 Mar 10 to 17 Mar 10: RHT article is viewed 198 times (avg. 11/day)

18 Mar 10, 11:23-15:29: user:389melanie creates first draft of RHT article on user:talk page [user:389melanie/Robin Hood tax]. The article includes references to Financial transaction tax and Currency transaction tax while still on talk page. At 16:10, posts this as change to article. This is article's first non-redirect since creation. User:389melanie also adds cross reference to RHT article in article Financial transaction tax at 16:12, and continues edits of RHT until 17:09. Only one activity of this user thereafter, changing a date in an unrelated article. User:389melanie has no contributions after 18 March other than this one item. Original article as left by 389melanie was 5.1k. Article is viewed 74 times this day. (Note: per her blog she was at Oxfam Live in Nottingham on 14 Mar 10.)

19 Mar 10, 13:56: user:FeydHuxtable expands article to 10.7k. Expansion includes citations to The Guardian, Reuters, The Financial Times. Two Guardian pieces are editorials, openly advocating for the RHT organization. The Financial Times cite does not refer to the tax, a Tobin tax, or the campaign, and predates the launch. The Reuters piece merely reports the publicity campaign launch, clearly quoting from a press release. The later Guardian pieces cover a U.S. Chamber of Commerce press release and the purported Goldman attack above. Article is viewed 75 times this day, and only 32 times the next day.

19 Mar 10, 14:52: user:Boyd Reimer creates article Halifax Initiative which includes the statement " On March 23, 1999, thanks to the Halifax Initiative work with Members of Parliament, members from all five political parties contributed to a vote which passed a private member motion on the Tobin tax." It lists as citation for support of the statement one sentence in the Canadian Parliament session report for 23 March 1999 (a 360 page document comprising 800k).

19 Mar 10, 16:19: user:Boyd Reimer starts a discussion on Halifax Initiative and Tobin tax on whether Halifax Initiative or New Internationalist are reliable sources. This is joined within one hour by user:Arthur Rubin, an administrator.

22 Mar 10: Anonymous user:193.133.69.201, which resolves to Oxfam UK, makes minor changes to RHT aggregating under 50 characters, and deletes one sentence. Article is viewed 75 times this day and 44-45 times each of next 2 days.

25 Mar 10: user:Beganlocal significantly expands article. Article is viewed 88 times this day, and under 55 times each of next 3 days.

29 Mar 10, 11:25-14:21: user:Boyd Reimer edits article for style & organization. Article is viewed 177 times this day and 56 the next.

29 Mar 10, 16:00-17:56: user:FeydHuxtable significantly expands article with materials primarily from the RHT website, including reports of the purported "attack".

9 subsequent non-minor edits until my tagging on 10 Jun 10. Article is viewed 1324 times in April.

It is clear that the 4 Boyd Reimer articles and Robin Hood tax article are part of an orchestrated, paid publicity campaign. I suggest the following articles & users be referred to administrators for investigation, with possible article reversions/deletions as appropriate.

  • Tobin tax
  • Financial transaction tax
  • Robin Hood tax
  • Spahn tax
  • Ox-Tales
  • User:Boyd Reimer
  • Now inactive users 389melanie, WWWords, Cosmic Cube

My apologies to all for this lengthy bit of sleuthing, but I felt it was needed to document this apparent violation of Wiki policies.

If you like sleuthing you may be interested in the WikiScanner. I haven't used it myself but others have found it illuminating. I have added the COI tag to the article until some resolution has been reached. There is nothing to stop you as a non-admin from queering this article on the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. Many (most?) of the pharmaceutical drugs here on WP appear to be straight adverts as well.--Aspro (talk) 10:47, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Oldtaxguy,
That is some impressive sleuthing. Thanks for your contribution. However, your sleuthing did not go far enough so I feel I should point out a few things:
1. I am not an inactive user.
2. I am not a representative of Oxfam or any other activist group.
3. The bulk of my contributions have been to improve articles through judicious editing and reorganization, eliminating unreliable sources, and counteracting blatant attempts to use Wikipedia as an advertising platform (my last edit on the Tobin tax article was to enforce Wikipedia policies regarding this). Please read the archived discussion page from the Tobin tax article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Tobin_tax/Archive_4) for some further insight into my efforts.
In short, I have gone out of my way in attempting to bring the articles I have worked on up to encyclopedic standards (although the Tobin tax article, admittedly, still needs a lot of work) while respecting and enforcing Wikipedia policies. I do not appreciate having my efforts disparaged by your insinuations.
In the future, please carry out your sleuthing to its logical end before making conclusions regarding the motivations of any other editor. Even then you should be really careful: WP:NPA. In particular, make note of "Accusations about personal behavior that lack evidence. Serious accusations require serious evidence."
Incidentally, if you want to see a real example of collusion among activists / supporters then look at the comment from FeydHuxtable to 389melanie on the latter's talk page:

"Hi, just wanted to apologise in case youre still watching the Robin Hood Tax article you created and feel Ive gone overboard in compromising with the objectors. Your original article was very well written and informative, but it didnt meet all our guidelines, mainly as it was sourced largely to the robin hood site itself rather than secondary sources like independent news papers. The campaign has lost much of its high level support for now, and it looks like opinion among decision makers has generally swung in a deflationary direction. But this cannot possibly last for more than 3 – 4 years considering the massive levels of public debt and the increasing ineffectiveness of anti progressive propaganda. When events swing back in a pleasing direction they'll move with some force. Keep the faith! FeydHuxtable (talk) 16:38, 14 June 2010 (UTC)"

Cosmic Cube (talk) 02:02, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AMT collaboration

[edit]

Thanks for the excellent suggestions. I've been too busy lately with life outside of Wikipedia to take on that article. I think your outline is right on with some allowance for going into more detail than one might see in a traditional media article on the topic. Wikipedia can permit more elaboration since it's not constrained by fixed pages (unlike traditional encyclopedias).

I will hazard a guess that you know a lot more about tax issue than I do. In addition to helping make things more english, I can work on the wiki-markup around citation etc.

We could collaborate using a sub-page on your or my user name. I've seen that you've used your talk page for exactly that, but it's easy to create another page under a user name that's not for discussion topics.

If you like, i can create one under my name and we can go to town on improving this important, but currently impenetrable article.Mattnad (talk) 21:24, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, the subsection looks good. One other thought, high level, is renaming the article to "Alternative Minimum Tax (Individual)" so we can focus the article, without apology, on the personal income tax.Mattnad (talk) 15:13, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you haven't come across this recent tool created by the tax foundation, it will be a very useful EL. I'll add it now to the article: [1]. It's the first time I've seen such a straight forward way of helping people see if they are hit by the AMT, both in the current tax law and guesses about the future.
Caution with that site: it's a long time lobbying site that has no problems misrepresenting things to support their agenda. Better tools for seeing what your tax is at present are at H&R Block, TurboTax, dinkytown.net, and a few others. H&R & TT are both tax software providers with excellent software and online programs. I use a more complex one from CCH (VERY not recommended for average user). I know Tax Foundation has a lot of supporters on Wikipedia, but I've found them to be highly biased and unreliable.

Tax

[edit]

Thanks for your help at Tax, it's very much needed. (Your rewrite to the corporate tax section was good; unfortunately most sections need just as much work!)

As for the expatriation tax, I don't think your reference suffices for the section as written. It says

The most significant Expatriation Tax is one found in the USA.

and your reference gives details of the US expatriation tax, but no comparisons to other such taxes.

Do you think this sentence should stay? If so, any ideas for properly referencing it?

CRGreathouse (t | c) 14:47, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I don't have enough experience in expatriation in other than the U.S. to comment on the sentence. So I left it as I found it. I think Canada at one time (maybe still) had a deemed sale provision, but I can't remember the details. I don't have a problem with deleting the "most significant" clause and merely using the U.S. as an example. I also think using the reference to a particular modifying act is really appropriate, especially since it has since been further changed (and the later changes were more significant). Perhaps the sentences would be better as "For example, under the United States provision, any individual who ..." Always happy to hear ideas of others. Note that I'm slowly working on various enhancements in the tax area, especially U.S. Oldtaxguy (talk) 03:05, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I think I'll make those changes. Good luck with the other tax articles -- many that I've seen are in sad shape, so you'll have your work cut out for you.
CRGreathouse (t | c) 18:12, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Overlinking in introductions

[edit]

I think you're right, I've moved the links that I added to Alternative Minimum Tax out of the introduction. Edward (talk) 05:01, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

[edit]

removed after action Oldtaxguy (talk) 20:56, 4 December 2010 (UTC) SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun![reply]

Taxation article

[edit]

I really, really like the layout you suggested. Nicely lays things out and suggests good areas for helpful sub-articles to keep the length somewhat reasonable. I can't really offer to help as my time sucks, but where I can, I'll help. Bad thing to say, but would rather say something than compliment without saying anything about helping one way or the other.  :( Ravensfire (talk) 21:36, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

While my time is limited nowadays on Wikipedia, I'll do what I can to help out if we're going to focus on a particular article. Your layout on Taxation in the United States looks like a good structure to me. We may need to adjust the headings a bit to better line up with WP:HEAD, as Headings should not explicitly refer to the subject of the article, or to higher-level headings, unless doing so is shorter or clearer. This may be a case where such is clearer, but we'll need to consider that since it has a bit of duplication. Morphh (talk) 16:49, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Prod of Federal taxation in the United States

[edit]

I agree with the redirect/merge of Federal taxation in the United States but don't think Proposed deletion is the right way to handle it. If you're only redirecting, I think the talk page discussion is sufficient. If you want to discuss it as a potentially controversial deletion, it would be better to use Articles for deletion instead. --Pnm (talk) 05:44, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Taxation in the US rewrite

[edit]

I've created stubs for all redlinks on the main article in my userspace. Thanks for your response on the idea behind the rewrite, btw. It's enough of a shift that I'm still having some issues getting my head totally around it. It will get there though. I'm going to try to get some more done this week - kinda depends on how crazy work gets. Ravensfire (talk) 17:44, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tip

[edit]

Thank you for pointing out your objection with my marking of a minor edit. I really did need to review the guidelines.

Teimu.tm (talk) 05:46, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Use of minor edit flag

[edit]

According to the history, I have never edited the article Tax Day. Could you please link me to the actual edit diff? —Keenan Pepper 16:56, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I must be going crazy. I was sure I got a message about it, but you must be right because you never edited my talk page. Sorry for the confusion! —Keenan Pepper 07:42, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Importer of record

[edit]

The article Importer of record has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A dictionary definition per WP:NOT#DICT. Suggest transwiki to wikitionary unless someone has a suitable merge/redirect target.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Zachlipton (talk) 04:22, 22 February 2011 (UTC) Deletion in WP is fine. Thanks. I added to Wiktionary. Oldtaxguy (talk) 04:33, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pirating of Wikipedia content for profit

[edit]

The following appeared in the Barnes & Noble online site: Income Tax In The United States by Frederic P. Miller (Editor), Agnes F. Vandome (Editor), John McBrewster (Editor) Product Details 

   * Pub. Date: October 2010
   * Publisher: VDM Publishing House Ltd.
   * Format: Paperback , 172pp

   * ISBN-13: 9786132897756
   * ISBN: 6132897755

Synopsis

High Quality Content by WIKIPEDIA articles! The federal government of the United States imposes a progressive tax on the taxable income of individuals, partnerships, companies, corporations, trusts, decedents' estates, and certain bankruptcy estates. Some state and municipal governmentsalso impose income taxes. The first Federal income tax was imposed (under Article I, section 8, clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution) during the Civil War, then again in the 1890s, and again after the Sixteenth Amendment was ratified in 1913. Current income taxes are imposed under these constitutional provisions and various sections of Subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, including 26 U.S.C. § 1 (imposing income tax on the taxable income of individuals, estates and trusts) and 26 U.S.C. 11 (imposing income tax on the taxable income of corporations).

Also

[edit]

Excise Tax in the United States by Frederic P. Miller (Editor), Agnes F. Vandome (Editor), John McBrewster (Editor) Product Details 

   * Pub. Date: September 2010
   * Publisher: VDM Publishing House Ltd.
   * Format: Paperback , 78pp

   * ISBN-13: 9786132791429
   * ISBN: 6132791426

Synopsis

High Quality Content by WIKIPEDIA articles! Excise tax, sometimes called an excise duty, is a type of tax. In the United States, the term "excise" means: (A) any tax other than a property tax or capitation (i.e., an indirect tax, or excise, in the constitutional law sense), or (B) a tax that is simply called an excise in the language of the statute imposing that tax (an excise in the statutory law sense). An excise under definition (A) is not necessarily the same as an excise under definition (B). Excise taxes are often seen as a tax on items like gasoline, tobacco and alcohol (sometimes referred to as sin taxes). The tax is usually a flat amount for a certain quantity of the item (for example, the state of Pennsylvania charges $1.60 for a pack of 20 cigarettes, which is on top of the federal cigarette excise of $1.01).

Frustrating, isn't it? There are more than a few publishers that do this, actually. I can't remember off the top of my head, but I've seen several mentioned on various policy pages after people spot them on Amazon. So the big question is really is this legal? If done right, it probably is. The CC-BY-SA 3.0 license and WP's own Terms of Use allow this if the work is attributed correctly. I usually just laugh it off and point to the stupidity of people. Why would someone willingly pay ANYTHING for something I can get for free? Especially when most of the articles are summaries and you're going to need to go to the sources for more details!
The publishers that don't follow the license do piss me off. They try to pass off someone else's work as their own, and that's just BS. Those you bring to the Foundation's attention and let them hammer away. It's part of their purpose after all. Ravensfire (talk) 16:45, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
IANAL.
The real question is whether they are licensing the content properly. If not, and you contributed materials, then you may have 17 USC § 106 rights and § 501-505 remedies. (No comment on § 506.)
But if they have followed the terms of either the GFDL or CC-BY-SA then they're pretty much within their rights. Wikipedia explicitly permits for-profit uses of its materials, provided certain formalities are used.
CRGreathouse (t | c) 17:10, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

[edit]
Tax-deductible Barnstar
I Morphh award you this tax-deductible Barnstar for your tax related contributions and involvement in WikiProject Taxation.
[edit]

Hello. Concerning your contribution, United States tax law and social policy, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from https://patriottaxsolutions.com/blog/the-federal-tax-law/. As a copyright violation, United States tax law and social policy appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. United States tax law and social policy has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While contributions are appreciated, Wikipedia must require all contributors to understand and comply with its copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. De728631 (talk) 19:27, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw that you've taken the texts from Taxation in the United States which has apparently been the source for that blog entry, given the date in the blog is younger than our Wikipedia text. So I'm not quite sure about the copyright status. Going to ask some admins. De728631 (talk) 19:34, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If the WP article is copyright infringement, then it should be deleted. Left you a note. Oldtaxguy (talk) 19:37, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've put it up for review at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2011 March 13 but as I said it looks like we've got the older rights here. De728631 (talk) 19:43, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

As your request for my help in fixing the CFR links is about to be archived, I wanted to remind you to reply with the actual URL format, to see if I can rewrite the template to match it. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 23:03, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Section 179 depreciation deduction

[edit]

Hi. I saw your comments on the talk page for Section 179 depreciation deduction from last December. I'm trying to find out the specifications and restrictions of this deduction for 2012, but the article itself does not contain any 2012 relevant sections, most are for dates as far back as 2004. You seem very knowledgeable about this subject, so I was wondering if you could update the article with current data. If not or if you're too busy that's cool, I hope there's no harm asking. Thanks! --Captain Infinity (talk) 15:32, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Good suggestion. Oldtaxguy (talk) 20:49, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! --Captain Infinity (talk) 22:38, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know

[edit]

You have been mentioned at Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians Ottawahitech (talk) 02:18, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Income tax, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Social Security (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:14, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

[edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:14, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request for expert attention

[edit]

Hi. I found you via Wikipedia:WikiProject Directory/Description/WikiProject Taxation, and hope you might take a look at Florida state Unemployment Tax. I was just hopping through Special:Random and was about to fix the formatting of the first citation, but noticed that it didn't seem to add up. fredgandt 22:35, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have proposed the subject article for deletion. See discussion in the talk section of that article.Oldtaxguy (talk) 22:52, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks :-) fredgandt 01:25, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Income tax in the United States

[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Income tax in the United States you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cryptic C62 -- Cryptic C62 (talk) 01:40, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Income tax in the United States

[edit]

The article Income tax in the United States you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Income tax in the United States for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cryptic C62 -- Cryptic C62 (talk) 00:21, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

[edit]

Hello, Oldtaxguy. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Oldtaxguy&oldid=1038105433"