High-Income Tax Returns For 2007 - Irs: Fill & Download for Free

I am not living in India so I don't feel how changes are happening in day to day life but yes parents , relatives and friends are giving us what changes they are seeing.Out of this last month I visited India and I had to done lot of pending works including queries of 2007 IRS returns and was travelling to different cities from Ahmedabad.I was on my International Free Data Roaming and was able to book railway tickets from my Mobile and that is tatkal. Back in 2010 even booking a ticket on opening day at 8:15 AM in the morning from my office network was not possible at all. Thanks to new website and integrated features of IRCTC.I was having a query for my 2007 IRS, which was filled from Pune. I lost all document related to IRS for that year which includes my FD and those details. (People who are not aware than Income Tax started documenting online only after 2008) so for me only luck is to get a physical copy of IRS, I been to Pune for same.1st surprise - In my tight schedule I took a chance to visit IRS at 5:00 in the evening, staff were busy and was able to get my number at 6:15. I double check the clock, its a government office and I was meeting my ward personal at 6:15 in the evening. But they were not able to locate my IRS, only they found was my return status with exact return amount.2nd surprise - As amount of investment was high and I lost all hopes to get details by my own. I again thought to visit IT-Ahmedabad and I was late at doctor's place I was able to reach at 5:30 to Income Tax office. Here I again got surprise that people were still working, I mate Mr. Pandya at 7 Anex of Income Tax Ahmedabad office, he grated me and asked me to wait in his cabin. I was unknown to him and he went out for end of day meeting with his manager and back in 15 minutes. He allowed me to seat in his cabin and put a trust on me. He got my PAN detailed and tried to call his connections into central office. Yes they were also working at 6 in the evening. They were not able to collect any information but Mr. Pandya asked my personal number and time to give me a call back. And told me that he will get back to me in a day or two. I gave my number and thought that this is good and he is supporting a lot but I don't think this will help me. To my surprise on next to next Day at 10:30 in the morning he gave me a call and gave me exact file number which I should go and ask for which is containing my return filing information. Kudos, this government fellow went beyond his expectation.What they got in return nothing not a single rupees of bribe but they got precious thing that is confidence from citizens in government.Adhar Card: This initiative was started by UPA and was good but to get an Adhar card is like long lasting task. Me and my wife both gave finger print and retina check in just 20 mins and our card came in 2 weeks.Apart from this now I can see all government bodies like offices, schools, hospitals are much more clean and looks like professional places.There are still lot more area which really missed from good governance area and most horrible is Post Office, though I am confident that once central will take it in their hand they will improve a lot.Thanks goes to Modi government and people working under him.

Let's first acknowledge that many people have suggested that the system would work better with a flat tax that everybody paid. There might still be some standard deductions, so someone at the lower end wouldn't see a huge increase in their taxes, but the theory is that everyone would once again have skin in the game and have some motive to support moderated spending. It is a tribute to the independence of Americans that we have not yet ganged up on the rich even more than we have, because once you get to the point where 50% + 1 of the voters pay no taxes, they might in theory vote to double taxes, double expenditures, and they wouldn't feel a bit of pain. Fortunately, a large percentage of non taxpayers vote for an economic philosophy that they believe works better for the whole country (including, in the long run, themselves and their children), even if it isn't the scheme that benefits them the most in the short run. Some liberals believe they do this because they are ignorant. Those voters often return the sentiment, since most of us don't like being told that we don't know what's good for us.Here's the best set of graphs I've found so far to use as a starting point for facts. I really, really recommend them to everyone. The author describes himself as a center-lefty (he says with a straight face that the lowest 40% of Americans are "the poor", which I find terribly offensive, having traveled a bit outside the US), which is great from my point of view because I grow weary having to defend the very similar data that comes from Heritage or other conservative sources.http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/04/how-we-pay-taxes-11-charts/255954/This second group of charts is, again, hardly without its point of view, but the fact that I think it's a little slanted to the left makes it harder to discredit for those who tend to disagree with me.http://ctj.org/ctjreports/2012/04/who_pays_taxes_in_america.phpFinally, this is from an organization that is probably right of center but the data is right out of the IRS.http://taxfoundation.org/sites/taxfoundation.org/files/docs/fed_indincometax_irssummary-2009-20111019-6.pdf"Rich" is in our heads. You are almost certainly richer than most noblemen were three centuries ago, but you probably don't feel that way. You want to be rich compared to other Americans, not compared to Afghans or Incas or Knights of the Round Table. There are always far more of the not-rich than the rich, because almost nobody but Warren Buffet admits to himself or anyone else that he's rich. As an American, if you are making $500,000 a year, the rich are still only the people above you on the graph. (A few of you are lucky enough to admit that I'm right; that type of salary comes nowhere close to buying you the apartment you really want on Central Park West, nor frequent use of an airplane that flies when and where you want it to, and probably not a second house or a full time driver, etc.) Those who are enjoying stuff we cannot afford are obviously not paying enough taxes, we tend to believe. Clearly someone who has a box at the stadium could afford to pay $5000 more taxes than they do right now with less negative impact on her life than I could. Also, by the way, she had rich parents. This is unfair - we did not start on a level playing field. So let's all go to her house during the baseball game and steal some paintings. Okay, I won't do that, but maybe I can get the federal government to take away a little more of her income - that will make me feel better.Sincerely, with all my heart, I ask everyone to define what fairness would look like. If we were ready for a completely different system of taxation, we could base it on consumption. Buffett would win because he is the kind of guy who continues to live in a one-story house in Oklahoma. The hotshot who gets his first big commission and buys the Maserati would pay more, and after all it's him we envy, not Warren. But of course you can live a very beautiful life just hanging out with rich people, as their guest, or on a business expense account. We envy the guy who stays in suites everywhere and expenses $300 dinners every night. It's hard to find anyone who believes it is economically or politically feasible to tax wealth (as opposed to income) (aside from local property taxes, which do a pretty good job). So let's stick with our current system and talk about Form 1040 total income, before deductions or anything. Aside from those on the Forbes list and Presidential candidates, we usually don't know what that number is, even for our siblings, much less our neighbors. But we know from IRS tables how many people are in various percentiles. (See the third link at the top.)As you consider statistics, bear in mind that the IRS statistics are based on tax returns filed, not individuals. There are several footnotes, but of course people who didn't make enough money to even file a return have to be counted somewhere by policy makers. But there are all kinds of hairpin turns that we amateurs run the risk of missing. For instance, when you look at patterns in household income, you need to keep in mind that the data often don't adjust for the fact that households have not been constant in terms of the number of employed workers. For instance, as the percentage of people living alone grows, household income is technically down. More fathers are leaving their families behind, and more unmarried couples have two households and file separately (whereas just twenty years ago they would have been more likely to move in together). Changes in tax law sometimes make adjusted gross income numbers impossible to compare year over year.I want to examine two somewhat related statistics: the actual portion of someone's income that goes to the government, and the percentage of federal revenues paid by the people who make that amount of money. These two numbers are batted around a lot, with one school saying that high earners supply a great deal of the total revenue and don't get enough credit for that, and the other school saying that this is somehow irrelevant or at least a misdirection. This distinction is no less important than that between wealth and income (we're continuously being a bit sloppy when we equate the two).In 2009, the infamous 1% were the people with a tax return showing an adjusted gross income anywhere above $343,927. They earned 16.93% of all the income shown on all tax returns. They paid 24.1% of their income in federal income tax, and supplied 36.73% of all federal income tax revenue.More interestingly, if we want to focus on the really wealthy, the IRS began publishing statistics on the top .1% of tax returns starting ten years ago. That's about 130,000 returns. To be in that club in 2007, your return had to have an adjusted gross income over $2,155,365. In 2009 these people collectively made less money than any year since 2003, so you could stay in that bracket with only $1,432,890. You don't have to feel sorry for them, but it does serve to remind us that rather than punching a clock, they are making their money on investments, and investments can go very, very badly. This group earned 7.8% of all the income shown on all returns combined, paid 24.28% of their income in taxes, and supplied 17.11% of all the revenue collected via the income tax.The third link is an article that attempts to take into account the payroll, state, local and sales taxes that Americans pay, which produces a more accurate picture of the burden that poorer people pay. According to the best and most current (2011) information I can find (found in the second link), the top 1% of earners pay 29% of their income in federal, state and local taxes, and supply 21.6% of all federal revenue (income and payroll). The bottom 20% pay 17% of their income in federal, state and local taxes, and supply 2.1% of the revenue. The top 20% of all earners supply 82.3% of all revenue.++++++So again, my challenge: what would fair be? Should the top 1% supply 50%, or 60%, of all revenue? (For the record, they couldn't supply 60% if you seized all their annual income.) By all means, feel free to declare openly that it's really the distribution of income that bothers you, not the plight of the poor. Frankly, that's what I hear most about. If you believe that tax rates should be changed to slow the growth of income at the top, just say you are unhappy because some people make too much money, way more than you, and that's unfair. I am openly calling that the politics of envy and class warfare, even if people I greatly respect prefer to call it by its respectable name, socialism. If you're saying it to yourself, you should go camping with a good book and learn to appreciate the inexpensive joys of life, but there is hope for you. If you are saying it to voters to make them angry and vote against the mean greedy bad rich people, you are doing something I cannot approve of.But if this is trolling on my part, and you consider yourself a mainstream political thinker, give it a shot: what would be fair? Sorry to poke my finger in your chest this way, but until we agree on a definition of a target, a description of a rate that you would be willing to say is fair, we get nowhere. For the record, I think it's pretty fair right now.

According to govt filings, AMT, a family-owned company that earned more than a million dollars a year, never filed federal taxes for 13 years; the same family then created a new (family-owned) company called Gordian, and sold the AMT assets to Gordian for a $2 million note that was never paid.Tax Evasion As Public Policy: The AMT/Gordian StoryBy Jeff Kreisler, Chief Satirist, Not-AMT/Not-GordianSkyrocketing health care costs are a major public policy issue. The Affordable Care Act has limited mechanisms to reign in these costs, but, really, we, the providers of health care products and services, must lead on this issue. We must innovate new, creative, and effective ways to eliminate excessive and unnecessary financial burdens.When it comes to cutting costs, we at AMT/Gordian, consider ourselves trailblazers. Since our inception, we’ve focused on eliminating one major financial drain. Which one? Federal Income Tax. How did we cut it? We never paid any. Is that even legal? Shhhhh, don’t speak.America’s corporate tax rate is 35%! If something regularly consumed 35% of your budget, wouldn’t you do everything you possibly could to eliminate it? Especially if all it took was some paperwork and a complete lack of ethics? Of course you would. And of course we did, because that’s the AMT/Gordian/New-Name-TBD way.Let me tell you our story:American Medical Technologies (“AMT”) was founded in 1994 by Gerald Del Signore. From 1994 until 2007, not only did we not pay any federal income tax, we didn’t even file a single income tax return. This wasn’t because we had no money - we were pulling in $35 million per year – but because, as they might say, you can’t spell “making millions by evading taxes” without “evading taxes.”In 2007, his highness Mr. Del Signore sold AMT in a sham transaction to Gordian, which was wholly owned by him, his wife, and his kid. There’s nothing more American than a family business, right?Of course, we kept using the AMT name, logo, staff, and resources… but we changed our corporate name, so it’s cool. Every great innovator changes names when the heat is on: Arthur Anderson consulting became “Accenture” around the time of Enron, Philip Morris is now “Altria,” and even Darth Vader goes by “Anakin Skywalker.”All through this whole journey, we continued to evade taxes. (Sure, the IRS is trying to recoup $17 million in back taxes and liabilities, but, pfft, like they have the resources to do it? Ha).From our very unbiased and not-at-all-perverse perspective, those 17 million dollars are actually “health care cost savings.” You’re welcome, America.And consider this: By not even filing taxes for 13 years, we also saved hours of labor costs for the cash-strapped IRS. So it’s a win-win-win all around.Furthermore, had we actually paid our taxes, losing all that money would have made us sick to our stomachs. Which, of course, would have required medical attention. Which would have raised health care costs. Which would have caused us to earn more money, and pay more taxes, and feel worse, and get more medical attention, etc. ad infinitum. So, if we had done what was legal and ethical and right, it would have started a vicious cycle that would have destroyed the America we love and so faithfully exploit.Here at AMT/Gordian/Whatever-Shell-Corporate-Name-Is-Next, we’ve always operated under one core philosophy: “What’s good for our company – and its sole owner and his family– is good for America. Probably.”“Oh,” you might ask, “but what about the lost tax revenue?” We believe being broke will motivate Americans to work harder, and manual labor is exercise, and exercise improves health so… Boom! More health care savings right there. We at AMT/Gordian/All-Hail-Satan never stop giving. I mean, we never stop taking. Whatever, giving, taking, who can tell the difference?Bottom line: Our bold and ridiculous tax evasion has been good, patriotic public policy because it sort of, kind of cuts health care costs. I’m sharing our strategy with you because if there are enough dishonest, disreputable, and shameful cheaters, they won’t be able to catch us all.Yours in disrepute,Jeff KreislerChief SatiristNot-AMT/Not-Gordian