scholarly journals Social Security Benefits Taxation: Issues And Present Status

2012 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 659
Author(s):  
Ralph B. Fritzsch ◽  
Neal R. VanZante ◽  
Catherine Gaharan
Keyword(s):  
Social Security ◽  
Income Tax ◽  
Tax Law ◽  
Font Size ◽  
Tax Rate ◽  
Taxable Income ◽  
Current State ◽  
Federal Income Tax ◽  
Gross Income ◽  
Social Security Benefits

<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: small;"> </span><p style="margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt; text-align: justify; mso-pagination: none;" class="MsoBodyText"><span style="color: black; font-size: 10pt; mso-themecolor: text1;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">Taxation of Social Security benefits was introduced in 1983 as part of a general restructuring of Social Security.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As part of the 1993 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act, taxation of benefits was revised and expanded.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Inclusion of social security benefits as part of taxable income is determined by comparing a modification of adjusted gross income and half of social security benefits to threshold amounts established in each tax law. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Unlike most amounts used to determine tax, the thresholds were not subject to indexation or revision. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This paper examines the current state of social security taxation in light of personal income changes, social security benefit revisions and federal income tax rate and bracket modifications that have taken place over the fourteen years since the last revision in taxation of benefits.</span></span></p><span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: small;"> </span>

Does the Federal Income Tax Law Favor Entrepreneurs?

2020 ◽  
Vol 73 (4) ◽  
pp. 1219-1232
Author(s):  
Eric Toder
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Growth Phase ◽  
Income Tax ◽  
Tax Law ◽  
Effective Tax Rate ◽  
Tax System ◽  
Tax Rate ◽  
New Business ◽  
Federal Income Tax ◽  
Income Tax Law

This paper estimates the effective tax rate on entrepreneurial income, defined as the return to an individual who starts a successful new business and then sells their interest once it becomes an established enterprise. The rate depends on both the tax imposed on the appreciation of the firm’s value during its growth phase and on the effects of the tax system on the value of equity in ongoing business enterprises. Under reasonable assumptions, this rate is lower than the rate the entrepreneur would pay on ordinary income. Preferential taxation of entrepreneurial income has consequences for both economic growth and income distribution.

Federal Income Tax Law

1927 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 230
Author(s):  
George M. Morris ◽  
Roland R. Foulke
Keyword(s):  
Income Tax ◽  
Tax Law ◽  
Federal Income Tax ◽  
Income Tax Law

scholarly journals Beneficial ownership of income as an antiabusive measure in Serbian Tax Law

2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (88) ◽  
pp. 217-232
Author(s):  
Miloš Vasović
Keyword(s):  
Income Tax ◽  
Corporate Income Tax ◽  
Tax Law ◽  
Tax Rates ◽  
Double Taxation ◽  
Current Function ◽  
Tax Rate ◽  
Treaty Shopping ◽  
Beneficial Ownership ◽  
The One

The Serbian Corporate Income Tax Act contains a provision on the beneficial ownership of income (hereinafter: the BO provision), which is one of the conditions for the application of the preferential tax rate on income tax after tax deduction, which is envisaged in Treaties for the avoidance of Double Taxation on income and capital (hereinafter: Double Taxation Treaties/ DTTs). The subject matter of research in this paper is the term "beneficial ownership", which is not defined in the Corportate Income Tax Act. It may ultimately lead to abusing the preferential tax rates from the DTTs in tax planning and "treaty shopping" through the use of conduit companies. Tax experts have different opinions on the legal nature of the BO provision, which is given the function of an anti-abusive measure (on the one hand) and a rule for the attribution of income (on the other hand). The author analyzes the current function of the BO provision envisaged in the Serbian Serbian Corporate Income Tax Act (CITA), and its inadequate application. The author advocates for enacting the BO provision as an anti-abusive measure, and examines the possible application of the BO provision in domestic tax law, with reference to Articles 10, 11, and 12 of the DTTs that Serbia contracted with other states, as well as Articles 10-12 of the OECD Model-Convention on Income and Capital (2017) and Commentaries on these articles. Such an application of the BO provision may preclude "treaty shopping". In final remarks, the author points out why the BO provision should be envisaged as an anti-abusive measure in Serbian tax law.

scholarly journals Management Of Accrual Components In Response To Corporate Income Tax Rate Changes: Evidence From Korea

2013 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 1421 ◽  
Author(s):  
Won-Wook Choi ◽  
Hyun-Ah Lee
Keyword(s):  
Financial Reporting ◽  
Income Tax ◽  
Tax Avoidance ◽  
Corporate Income Tax ◽  
Tax Rate ◽  
Taxable Income ◽  
Accruals Management ◽  
Accrual Management ◽  
Aggressive Tax Avoidance ◽  
Statutory Tax Rate

Changes in the statutory corporate income tax rate provide firms with an opportunity to reduce their tax burden by shifting their taxable income from higher to lower tax rate years. One negative consequence of shifting taxable income across years is higher variation in book income for financial reporting purposes. Taxable income and book income are closely related in most countries, and, in general, reporting volatile book income across years is not a favorable signal to investors. This study investigates how firms shift taxable income and concurrently mitigate book income fluctuation by managing accrual components separately when the statutory income tax rate changes. Unlike prior studies, we decompose discretionary accruals into two components and examine distinctive patterns of accrual management in Korea, where book-tax conformity is high and aggressive tax avoidance is restricted. We find that firms manage book-tax accruals for taxable income shifting and manage book-only accruals to mitigate book income fluctuation. Furthermore, we find the extent of book-tax and book-only accruals management varies depending on the firms tax and financial reporting costs. The results of this study provide clear and compelling evidence of firms opportunistic accrual management behavior in response to statutory tax rate reduction.

Contingent Legal Fees on Settlements and Awards and the Calculation of Gross Income by Individuals for United States Federal Income Tax Purposes

2004 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Michael P. Coyne ◽  
Richard Mason ◽  
John R. Mills
Keyword(s):  
Income Tax ◽  
Internal Revenue Service ◽  
Current Position ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Federal Income Tax ◽  
Gross Income ◽  
Legal Fees ◽  
Circuit Courts ◽  
Congressional Action

Lawsuits involving contingent legal fees are reasonably common. This paper focuses on the appropriateness of the inclusion in plaintiff's gross income for individual federal tax purposes of the portion of settlements going to attorneys for contingent legal fees. We present an example of the significant difference in taxes payable by a plaintiff under the two competing tax treatments. We also recap the current position of the various Circuit Courts on the issue using the opposing views of the Sixth to the Second and Seventh Circuits to frame a discussion of the issue and then discuss the treatment of securities classaction settlement proceeds that are apparently treated differently for tax purposes. The Supreme Court has recently granted certiorari in two cases and will be addressing the inclusion of contingent legal fees in gross income. We advocate that although taking the broader Sixth Circuit approach of excluding contingent attorney's fees on a joint endeavor theory would lead to more equitable results for plaintiffs, it would not necessarily be prudent judicial action and that the appropriate remedy to the situation may best be Congressional action, as the Internal Revenue Service has consistently favored inclusion.

5. Income tax

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn Wright ◽  
Clare Firth ◽  
Lucy Crompton ◽  
Helen Fox ◽  
Frances Seabridge ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Income Tax ◽  
Charitable Giving ◽  
Professional Training ◽  
Tax Law ◽  
Tax Rates ◽  
Taxable Income ◽  
Income Tax Law

Income tax is an essential part of a lawyer’s knowledge and professional training. Whilst it is not necessary to have knowledge to the extent that a specialist tax lawyer would have, it is necessary to have knowledge and understanding sufficient to recognise its implications as they arise and affect the client and ourselves. This chapter discusses sources of income tax law; collection and payment of income tax; rates of income tax and allowances; calculation of income tax; sources of taxable income; and charitable giving. This chapter covers all the changes introduced by the 2015 Budget.

Qualitative employment relationships for Ph.D. students in the EU?

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 48-65
Author(s):  
Petra Foubert ◽  
Alexander Maes ◽  
Michelle Wilms
Keyword(s):  
Social Security ◽  
Income Tax ◽  
Teaching Assistants ◽  
Parental Leave ◽  
Personal Income ◽  
Personal Income Tax ◽  
Employment Relationships ◽  
Social Contributions ◽  
Speed Up ◽  
Social Security Benefits

This contribution intends to shed light on the working conditions of Belgian and Italian Ph.D. students, from the angle of EU law. In Belgium these (mostly young) researchers can be recruited either as ‘Ph.D. fellows’ or ‘teaching assistants’. Ph.D. fellows have a student-like status: they touch a fellowship exempt from personal income tax. However, social contributions are being withheld, for them to enjoy social security benefits and build up pension rights. Teaching assistants have an employee-like position: they receive a salary which is subject to personal income tax as well as to social security contributions. In Italy, Ph.D. students have a standard student-like status, comparable to Belgian Ph.D. fellows. The working hypothesis is that the pressure that (Belgian) universities experience to speed up research efforts (and outcomes) does not necessarily lead to qualitative (employment) relationships but may, instead, create some sort of precarious work. In light of the recent work-life balance Directive, this contribution will illustrate the differences in status with regard to paternity and parental leave.

Measuring Revenue-maximizing Elasticities of Taxable Income

2016 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. 174-204 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Creedy ◽  
Norman Gemmell
Keyword(s):  
Income Tax ◽  
Tax Rates ◽  
Marginal Rate ◽  
Tax System ◽  
Tax Rate ◽  
Taxable Income ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The Us ◽  
Marginal Tax Rates ◽  
The Right

This article considers the question of whether marginal tax rates (MTRs) in the US income tax system are on the “right” side of their respective Laffer curves. Previous attention has tended to focus specifically on the top MTR. Conceptual expressions for these “revenue-maximizing elasticities of taxable income” (ETI L), based on readily observable tax parameters, are presented for each tax rate in a multi-rate income tax system. Applying these to the US income tax, with its complex effective marginal rate structure, demonstrates that a wide range of revenue-maximizing ETI values can be expected within, and across, tax brackets and for all taxpayers in aggregate. For some significant groups of taxpayers, these revenue-maximizing ETIs appear to be within the range of empirically estimated elasticities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document