acecupid
09-06 08:33 PM
Read something interesting on TOI..
NRIs treated as Not Required Indians! - India - NEWS - The Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/india/NRIs-treated-as-Not-Required-Indians/articleshow/4979439.cms)
Indubhai Amin, a non-resident Indian (NRI) settled in the UK earns interest income of Rs 3 lakh on his non-resident ordinary account bank deposit in
India in the current FY 2009-10. Enjoying his personal exemption limit of Rs 1.60 lakh and the eligible deduction of Rs 1 lakh u/s 80C, Amin is comfortable paying income tax of Rs 4,000 in the first slab of 10 per cent on his effective taxable income of Rs 40,000.
Flat tax of 20% and 30%
A huge shock awaits Amin and millions of NRIs, in regard to taxation of their interest and investment income and capital gains earned in India, proposed to be treated under the draft Direct Tax Code as "income from special sources."
In 2011-12, on the same interest income of Rs 3 lakh, Amin will be required to pay a hefty tax of Rs 60,000 at the flat rate of 20 per cent, without being eligible to claim any basic exemption or other deduction, as provided under rule three of the First Schedule to the Code.
Moreover, all capital gains earned by a non-resident will attract a flat tax of 30 per cent, irrespective of the amount of capital gains. While a resident Indian will be required to pay tax of Rs 3.84 lakh on his taxable income of Rs 25 lakh, an NRI earning equivalent capital gains will be called upon to pay almost double tax of Rs 7.5 lakh.
Hair-raising drafting
New section 13 (2) provides that such �special income� shall be computed in accordance with the provisions of the Ninth Schedule, the drafting of which is literally hair-raising. It provides that the amount of accrual or receipt shall be computed as the taxable income, and no loss, allowance or deduction shall be allowed, as the same shall be presumed to have been granted. The only exception in this regard, in respect of capital gains arising from the transfer of equity shares or units of equity oriented mutual fund chargeable to STT, is quite amusing, as it stands redundant in view of the proposal to abolish STT (a classic instance of incoherent drafting).
The draftsman does not seem to have realized the harsh implications. It means that if an NRI sells a capital asset purchased for Rs 10 lakh at Rs 30 lakh, he will be required to pay tax of Rs 9 lakh at 30 per cent on the gross sale consideration of Rs 30 lakh without any deduction even for the cost of acquisition of Rs 10 lakh (not to mention any benefit of indexation on the same).
Determination of residential status
The residential status of an individual under the Code is proposed to be determined as per the current norms. However, the status of "not ordinarily resident" (NOR) is proposed to be eliminated. Despite the above, Clause 24 of the Sixth Schedule has still provided for exemption in respect of interest earned on foreign currency deposits in the case of NOR. Poor drafting indeed!
The Code has proposed to retain the current exemptions availed by a non-resident in case of interest earned on NRE and FCNR deposits with banks.
Special exemption for returning NRIs
A useful exemption has been provided in case of income earned outside India, if it is not derived from a business controlled from India, in the financial year in which the returning NRI becomes an Indian resident and the immediately succeeding financial year. However, the benefit of the said exemption would be available, only if such individual was a non-resident for nine years immediately preceding the financial year in which he becomes a resident.
Wealth-tax liability for NRIs
Proposed Section 102 of the Code provides for wealth tax liability in the case of the value of all global assets of an individual or HUF. However, an exemption has been provided in case of the value of assets located outside India in case of an individual who is not a citizen of India or an individual or HUF not resident in India. Hence, while returning NRIs who are non-citizens will enjoy wealth-tax exemption for their overseas assets, NRIs with Indian citizenship becoming residents will attract wealth-tax liability on such assets held abroad.
Illogical exemption under wealth-tax
Talking about wealth tax, the Code prescribes an exemption in respect of any house or plot of land belonging to an individual or HUF, if it is acquired before April 1, 2000. It is difficult to understand the logic as to why this exemption has been denied in all cases where such immovable property is acquired after March 31, 2000!
Proposals That Will Hurt the Global Indian Sentiment
Flat Rate of Tax
20% flat tax on interest & other investment income
30% flat tax on all capital gains
Apart from 20% & 30% TDS on above, TDS at a baffling rate of 35% prescribed on all residual income
No Personal Exemption
No personal exemption or deduction allowed in computing the above income treated as �income from special sources�.
Weird Interpretation
Poor drafting leads to such a weird interpretation that transfer of a capital asset may attract 30% tax on gross sale consideration.
What Discrimination!
Ironical but true! Non-Indian sportspersons, say Ricky Ponting or Shoaib Akhtar, required to pay a concessional tax of 10% on their game, advertisement and column earnings in India, thus enjoying a more privileged tax status than our own sons of the soil living abroad.
NRIs treated as Not Required Indians! - India - NEWS - The Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/india/NRIs-treated-as-Not-Required-Indians/articleshow/4979439.cms)
Indubhai Amin, a non-resident Indian (NRI) settled in the UK earns interest income of Rs 3 lakh on his non-resident ordinary account bank deposit in
India in the current FY 2009-10. Enjoying his personal exemption limit of Rs 1.60 lakh and the eligible deduction of Rs 1 lakh u/s 80C, Amin is comfortable paying income tax of Rs 4,000 in the first slab of 10 per cent on his effective taxable income of Rs 40,000.
Flat tax of 20% and 30%
A huge shock awaits Amin and millions of NRIs, in regard to taxation of their interest and investment income and capital gains earned in India, proposed to be treated under the draft Direct Tax Code as "income from special sources."
In 2011-12, on the same interest income of Rs 3 lakh, Amin will be required to pay a hefty tax of Rs 60,000 at the flat rate of 20 per cent, without being eligible to claim any basic exemption or other deduction, as provided under rule three of the First Schedule to the Code.
Moreover, all capital gains earned by a non-resident will attract a flat tax of 30 per cent, irrespective of the amount of capital gains. While a resident Indian will be required to pay tax of Rs 3.84 lakh on his taxable income of Rs 25 lakh, an NRI earning equivalent capital gains will be called upon to pay almost double tax of Rs 7.5 lakh.
Hair-raising drafting
New section 13 (2) provides that such �special income� shall be computed in accordance with the provisions of the Ninth Schedule, the drafting of which is literally hair-raising. It provides that the amount of accrual or receipt shall be computed as the taxable income, and no loss, allowance or deduction shall be allowed, as the same shall be presumed to have been granted. The only exception in this regard, in respect of capital gains arising from the transfer of equity shares or units of equity oriented mutual fund chargeable to STT, is quite amusing, as it stands redundant in view of the proposal to abolish STT (a classic instance of incoherent drafting).
The draftsman does not seem to have realized the harsh implications. It means that if an NRI sells a capital asset purchased for Rs 10 lakh at Rs 30 lakh, he will be required to pay tax of Rs 9 lakh at 30 per cent on the gross sale consideration of Rs 30 lakh without any deduction even for the cost of acquisition of Rs 10 lakh (not to mention any benefit of indexation on the same).
Determination of residential status
The residential status of an individual under the Code is proposed to be determined as per the current norms. However, the status of "not ordinarily resident" (NOR) is proposed to be eliminated. Despite the above, Clause 24 of the Sixth Schedule has still provided for exemption in respect of interest earned on foreign currency deposits in the case of NOR. Poor drafting indeed!
The Code has proposed to retain the current exemptions availed by a non-resident in case of interest earned on NRE and FCNR deposits with banks.
Special exemption for returning NRIs
A useful exemption has been provided in case of income earned outside India, if it is not derived from a business controlled from India, in the financial year in which the returning NRI becomes an Indian resident and the immediately succeeding financial year. However, the benefit of the said exemption would be available, only if such individual was a non-resident for nine years immediately preceding the financial year in which he becomes a resident.
Wealth-tax liability for NRIs
Proposed Section 102 of the Code provides for wealth tax liability in the case of the value of all global assets of an individual or HUF. However, an exemption has been provided in case of the value of assets located outside India in case of an individual who is not a citizen of India or an individual or HUF not resident in India. Hence, while returning NRIs who are non-citizens will enjoy wealth-tax exemption for their overseas assets, NRIs with Indian citizenship becoming residents will attract wealth-tax liability on such assets held abroad.
Illogical exemption under wealth-tax
Talking about wealth tax, the Code prescribes an exemption in respect of any house or plot of land belonging to an individual or HUF, if it is acquired before April 1, 2000. It is difficult to understand the logic as to why this exemption has been denied in all cases where such immovable property is acquired after March 31, 2000!
Proposals That Will Hurt the Global Indian Sentiment
Flat Rate of Tax
20% flat tax on interest & other investment income
30% flat tax on all capital gains
Apart from 20% & 30% TDS on above, TDS at a baffling rate of 35% prescribed on all residual income
No Personal Exemption
No personal exemption or deduction allowed in computing the above income treated as �income from special sources�.
Weird Interpretation
Poor drafting leads to such a weird interpretation that transfer of a capital asset may attract 30% tax on gross sale consideration.
What Discrimination!
Ironical but true! Non-Indian sportspersons, say Ricky Ponting or Shoaib Akhtar, required to pay a concessional tax of 10% on their game, advertisement and column earnings in India, thus enjoying a more privileged tax status than our own sons of the soil living abroad.
wallpaper justin bieber new haircut
misha
07-21 04:34 PM
I am curious - Did you get a receipt notice for your wife? I have E-filed for AP for my family. I have got the paper receipt for me but not for my family. I am wondering if there is a pattern here.
Thanks,
Mitesh
I got the 1st AP receipt notice for my wife with I485 and EAD receipts in about 1 week after they entered our case into the system (September 2007). On October, 2007 she received EAD card but never received the actual approved AP.
I did not apply for EAD and AP. I'm still on H1B
Thanks,
Mitesh
I got the 1st AP receipt notice for my wife with I485 and EAD receipts in about 1 week after they entered our case into the system (September 2007). On October, 2007 she received EAD card but never received the actual approved AP.
I did not apply for EAD and AP. I'm still on H1B
rayoflight
12-21 01:51 PM
Thanks all for your replies.
2011 justin bieber with new haircut
gcwanted101
09-01 04:26 PM
Thanks gcwanted101.
So it looks like G639 is only for requests to USCIS and not for DOL.
Can anyone who has submitted an FOIA request to DOL for Labor docs clarify the process?
I browsed the DOL web site, but they don't seem to have a form similar to USCIS G-639 form.
lj_rr,
you dont need any special form to make FOIA request to DOL.
"The Department of Labor does not require a special form in order to make a FOIA request. Requests must be in writing, either handwritten or typed. Requests may be submitted by fax, courier services, mail, or to foiarequest@dol.gov. Although, as discussed immediately below, certain information may be required from a requester. "
U.S. Department of Labor -- Freedom of Information Act Guide (http://www.dol.gov/dol/foia/guide6.htm#how)
So it looks like G639 is only for requests to USCIS and not for DOL.
Can anyone who has submitted an FOIA request to DOL for Labor docs clarify the process?
I browsed the DOL web site, but they don't seem to have a form similar to USCIS G-639 form.
lj_rr,
you dont need any special form to make FOIA request to DOL.
"The Department of Labor does not require a special form in order to make a FOIA request. Requests must be in writing, either handwritten or typed. Requests may be submitted by fax, courier services, mail, or to foiarequest@dol.gov. Although, as discussed immediately below, certain information may be required from a requester. "
U.S. Department of Labor -- Freedom of Information Act Guide (http://www.dol.gov/dol/foia/guide6.htm#how)
more...
desi3933
03-03 12:30 PM
Desi, Thanks for the translation, it was very helpful. However, I failed to find in this document anywhere that a PD obtained from EB application can not be ported to an FB category.
Its not even for ENTIRE employment based category either.
As mentioned in the document, porting applies ONLY for immigrant petitions (I-140) approved under EB-1, EB-2 or EB-3 classification.
PD can NOT be ported for EB-4 and EB-5 either.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
Its not even for ENTIRE employment based category either.
As mentioned in the document, porting applies ONLY for immigrant petitions (I-140) approved under EB-1, EB-2 or EB-3 classification.
PD can NOT be ported for EB-4 and EB-5 either.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
logiclife
04-28 12:43 PM
This was a post I did 16 months ago, when Immigration Voice was 3 weeks old and no one knew anything about CIR of 2006.
As we have learned in 2006 and in last 16 months, it is not going to be possible to separate ourselves from illegal immigration no matter how much we try. Its just not going to happen.
There is some good news today from bloomberg:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=akTlfu6iVMK8&refer=home
As we have learned in 2006 and in last 16 months, it is not going to be possible to separate ourselves from illegal immigration no matter how much we try. Its just not going to happen.
There is some good news today from bloomberg:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=akTlfu6iVMK8&refer=home
more...
zephyrr
03-20 11:56 PM
Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?
Answer: An I-140 is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
A. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien’s I-485 has been pending 180
B. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal
that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.
I pulled this from the Aytes memo:http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21Intrm122705.pdf
Unless I'm not construing the above correctly, a withdrawl after 180 days has no impact. The only thing that would be a 'death-knell' is if an RFE is issued which the employer does not respond to.
withdrawl in that case would be death-knell to your AOS case..
there is theoretical opening for "approvable" 140 cases in yates memo, but it's more theory than practice, in the world wher USCIS is revoking approved 140s , one can't depend on such a slim glimmer of hope..
Answer: An I-140 is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
A. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien’s I-485 has been pending 180
B. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal
that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.
I pulled this from the Aytes memo:http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21Intrm122705.pdf
Unless I'm not construing the above correctly, a withdrawl after 180 days has no impact. The only thing that would be a 'death-knell' is if an RFE is issued which the employer does not respond to.
withdrawl in that case would be death-knell to your AOS case..
there is theoretical opening for "approvable" 140 cases in yates memo, but it's more theory than practice, in the world wher USCIS is revoking approved 140s , one can't depend on such a slim glimmer of hope..
2010 Pictures,justin bieber goes
WeShallOvercome
08-03 12:19 PM
Hopefully we will get them soon! Keeping fingers crossed! Just imagine the wait times for AP, EAD and eventually GC. Just forget about it!
At this time the guys who are seeking company are those who got their checks cleared, you have 99% of july population with you , if that gives you some comfort.
At this time the guys who are seeking company are those who got their checks cleared, you have 99% of july population with you , if that gives you some comfort.
more...
feedfront
09-29 12:03 PM
My cousin went for her sister-in-law's wedding and at New Delhi airport, the Customs Officer asked her to show the bag. Apparently, there was good amount of jewelry. And she had to declare it in her passport.
She was not charged any duty but she had to show it again during the departure.
Hope it helps.
I agree. If they make entry into passport, you've to show it during departure. Otherwise there is no hassle.
She was not charged any duty but she had to show it again during the departure.
Hope it helps.
I agree. If they make entry into passport, you've to show it during departure. Otherwise there is no hassle.
hair Justin+ieber+2011+haircut
madaram
08-09 11:25 AM
pls read what sensenbrenner has to say.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2006/08/09/EDGOBIQ0KA1.DTL
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2006/08/09/EDGOBIQ0KA1.DTL
more...
gparr
January 5th, 2005, 06:56 AM
Like this one a lot. I agree with Queen that it would be interesting to see one of the pots colored. Might try rotating the image so the pipe on the right is vertical. 2 deg. CW did it for me. Squares up the image better. Nice shooting.
hot How+to+do+justin+ieber+
sixburgh
08-13 06:05 PM
I saw some information somewhere, but don't have the link right away to post here.
But here is the crux of it.
Basically the guy said that : assuming that the wife is working on EAD, and the moment she gets an H4 extension approval, she automatically comes on H4 status, but the very next day if she goes back to work on EAD, the H4 status gets invalidated and person comes on AOS status instantly.
Now should she force the company to update the I-9 on that date, is the question.
The bottom line I think is : there is nothing called as a STATUS field in any USCIS or DOS computer system. Its what you do that determines your status. I believe USCIS allows dual intent.
Does anyone think that I am wrong?
But here is the crux of it.
Basically the guy said that : assuming that the wife is working on EAD, and the moment she gets an H4 extension approval, she automatically comes on H4 status, but the very next day if she goes back to work on EAD, the H4 status gets invalidated and person comes on AOS status instantly.
Now should she force the company to update the I-9 on that date, is the question.
The bottom line I think is : there is nothing called as a STATUS field in any USCIS or DOS computer system. Its what you do that determines your status. I believe USCIS allows dual intent.
Does anyone think that I am wrong?
more...
house Teen superstar Justin Bieber#39;s
singhsa3
10-21 07:00 PM
Any updates
tattoo Do for youngfeb , new
pcjandyala
07-23 10:48 AM
Rayyan,
It's always better to change the name in the passport (contact Passport office/Indian Embessy near by you) reflecting correctly when you have time now Otherwise it's really create problems in future either in GC or traveling to other countries etc.
Please look for procedure on Indian Embessy web site (if you are in USA) otherwise passport website in india.
My 2 cents
Thanks
It's always better to change the name in the passport (contact Passport office/Indian Embessy near by you) reflecting correctly when you have time now Otherwise it's really create problems in future either in GC or traveling to other countries etc.
Please look for procedure on Indian Embessy web site (if you are in USA) otherwise passport website in india.
My 2 cents
Thanks
more...
pictures Justin+ieber+new+hair+do
uma001
05-24 09:10 AM
I am also on same boat. My employer is doing initial process for filing labour. I am not sure he knows about this merit based points system. Do you want me to tell him to wait because of this new law in process or continue filing for PERM.My employer is american company.
dresses justin bieber haircut 2011
apb
09-14 06:52 PM
I missed out on this one...
more...
makeup justin bieber style haircut.
spgtopper
05-10 12:53 PM
An event in DC would be convinient for members who live or work in and around the DC area, and also because the concentration of working people in the city and vicinity is higher. People who work in the area can stop by after work and network over dinner.
Why don't we have this kind of events on week end? Many people will be able to attend and share their ideas.
Why don't we have this kind of events on week end? Many people will be able to attend and share their ideas.
girlfriend justin bieber new hairstyle.
vdlrao
10-26 09:53 AM
I have observed the same thing.
hairstyles Justin+ieber+haircut+2011
tempgc
09-24 01:25 PM
Source OH law firm (immigration-law.com)
No one should be surprised by the Los Angeles Times report that the USCIS is "considering" but not yet decided fee increases. As we reported earlier, the State Department is already seeking OMB approval for its consular and embassy services fee increase. Report says that the USCIS recorded a short fall of $118 million this fiscal year. One of the key reasons for the fund problem is cited reduced number of new case filings. Since the USCIS relies on the fee-income for its finance, it presents a problem. Another reason which is not discussed in the report may include its need for money to support ongoing reengineering project named business transformation program. This program is primarily funded by the premium processing service fee fund. Obviously, the PPS fund is suffering as well, particularly considering a drastic decrease of new employment-based cases. Another reason the report cited is need to funds to deal with potential increase in workload which are likely generated by the Comprehensive Immigration Reform, should the CIR be successfully enacted next year. However, this reason for fee increase may be considered too premature, considering the fact that the CIR may not be accomplished even in 2010. The most probable year for a successful CIR legislation is currently considered year 2011. Let's see what happens.
No one should be surprised by the Los Angeles Times report that the USCIS is "considering" but not yet decided fee increases. As we reported earlier, the State Department is already seeking OMB approval for its consular and embassy services fee increase. Report says that the USCIS recorded a short fall of $118 million this fiscal year. One of the key reasons for the fund problem is cited reduced number of new case filings. Since the USCIS relies on the fee-income for its finance, it presents a problem. Another reason which is not discussed in the report may include its need for money to support ongoing reengineering project named business transformation program. This program is primarily funded by the premium processing service fee fund. Obviously, the PPS fund is suffering as well, particularly considering a drastic decrease of new employment-based cases. Another reason the report cited is need to funds to deal with potential increase in workload which are likely generated by the Comprehensive Immigration Reform, should the CIR be successfully enacted next year. However, this reason for fee increase may be considered too premature, considering the fact that the CIR may not be accomplished even in 2010. The most probable year for a successful CIR legislation is currently considered year 2011. Let's see what happens.
Alabaman
08-21 02:52 PM
If your calculations are right then this is really really bad.
lostinbeta
10-03 02:18 AM
Glad I could help=)
No comments:
Post a Comment