<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for The Tax Issue</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thetaxissue.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thetaxissue.com</link>
	<description>David Wilkenfeld, CA · Canadian Tax Consultant</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 17:40:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Employment Insurance for the Self-Employed by kidam</title>
		<link>http://thetaxissue.com/employment-insurance-for-the-self-employed/#comment-109</link>
		<dc:creator>kidam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 17:40:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thetaxissue.com/?p=1282#comment-109</guid>
		<description>A bad bad idea - costly, stuck for life if you claim, and any earned income in the year that you claim will be taxed back - even if it was entirely earned before you asked for benefits. Don&#039;t, I repeat don&#039;t, enrol in this EI trap, especially with EI so-called premiums slated to rise for the next 4-5 years.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A bad bad idea &#8211; costly, stuck for life if you claim, and any earned income in the year that you claim will be taxed back &#8211; even if it was entirely earned before you asked for benefits. Don&#8217;t, I repeat don&#8217;t, enrol in this EI trap, especially with EI so-called premiums slated to rise for the next 4-5 years.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on WHAT&#8217;S YOUR TAX ISSUE? by TheTax Issue</title>
		<link>http://thetaxissue.com/whats-your-tax-issue/#comment-105</link>
		<dc:creator>TheTax Issue</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:51:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thetaxissue.com/?page_id=143#comment-105</guid>
		<description>Hello Nick. Thanks for the question. You might find the answer in my &lt;a href=&quot;http://thetaxissue.com/rolling-the-dice-with-the-irs/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;previous post on the topic&lt;/a&gt;.

DW</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello Nick. Thanks for the question. You might find the answer in my <a href="http://thetaxissue.com/rolling-the-dice-with-the-irs/" rel="nofollow">previous post on the topic</a>.</p>
<p>DW</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on WHAT&#8217;S YOUR TAX ISSUE? by Nick Chan</title>
		<link>http://thetaxissue.com/whats-your-tax-issue/#comment-102</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick Chan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 06:17:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thetaxissue.com/?page_id=143#comment-102</guid>
		<description>My Tax Issue

Hi David,

My wife won a couple of hundred dollars at a US casino last year and was mailed a 1042-S form.  She is Canadian and lives in Canada.  From her winnings, the casino withheld 30%.  Is it mandatory to file a NRA Income Tax Return?  If so, does she need to apply for an IRS Individual Taxpayer Identification Number?

It seems to be a big hassle for a couple of hundred dollars.

Thanks for your help,
Nick</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My Tax Issue</p>
<p>Hi David,</p>
<p>My wife won a couple of hundred dollars at a US casino last year and was mailed a 1042-S form.  She is Canadian and lives in Canada.  From her winnings, the casino withheld 30%.  Is it mandatory to file a NRA Income Tax Return?  If so, does she need to apply for an IRS Individual Taxpayer Identification Number?</p>
<p>It seems to be a big hassle for a couple of hundred dollars.</p>
<p>Thanks for your help,<br />
Nick</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on THE TAX ISSUE TAX ORGANIZER by &#187; Introducing The Tax Issue Tax Organizer for 2011!! The Tax Issue</title>
		<link>http://thetaxissue.com/the-tax-issue-tax-organizer/#comment-91</link>
		<dc:creator>&#187; Introducing The Tax Issue Tax Organizer for 2011!! The Tax Issue</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 14:06:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thetaxissue.com/?page_id=1218#comment-91</guid>
		<description>[...] THE TAX ISSUE TAX ORGANIZER [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] THE TAX ISSUE TAX ORGANIZER [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Salt in the Wounds? by &#187; Tax Court Rules On Ponzi Scheme Victims The Tax Issue</title>
		<link>http://thetaxissue.com/salt-in-the-wounds/#comment-80</link>
		<dc:creator>&#187; Tax Court Rules On Ponzi Scheme Victims The Tax Issue</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jan 2012 02:00:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fiscalitems.wordpress.com/?p=3#comment-80</guid>
		<description>[...] The Tax Court of Canada has recently confirmed the tax treatment of Ponzi scheme victims as I feared they would in the  very first issue of The Tax Issue. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The Tax Court of Canada has recently confirmed the tax treatment of Ponzi scheme victims as I feared they would in the  very first issue of The Tax Issue. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on ABOUT by Leslie Ginsberg CA</title>
		<link>http://thetaxissue.com/about/#comment-76</link>
		<dc:creator>Leslie Ginsberg CA</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 23:17:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jamieschreter.com/thetaxissue/?page_id=989#comment-76</guid>
		<description>Interesting comments and a good read.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting comments and a good read.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Loophole Repairs, Part One by &#187; CRA Weighs In On J.V.&#8217;s The Tax Issue</title>
		<link>http://thetaxissue.com/loophole-repairs-part-one/#comment-74</link>
		<dc:creator>&#187; CRA Weighs In On J.V.&#8217;s The Tax Issue</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Dec 2011 02:15:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thetaxissue.com/?p=1072#comment-74</guid>
		<description>[...] the CRA was asked about the new partnership year-end rules and joint ventures. As we reported in an earlier post, new rules were introduced in the 2011 budget that will essentially eliminate any tax deferral to a [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] the CRA was asked about the new partnership year-end rules and joint ventures. As we reported in an earlier post, new rules were introduced in the 2011 budget that will essentially eliminate any tax deferral to a [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Mr. CA Goes To Tax Court by michael dubinsky</title>
		<link>http://thetaxissue.com/mr-ca-goes-to-tax-court/#comment-72</link>
		<dc:creator>michael dubinsky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Oct 2011 16:00:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thetaxissue.com/?p=1179#comment-72</guid>
		<description>this very interesting. I was not aware of this informal procedure. i find your articles very informative. thanks</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>this very interesting. I was not aware of this informal procedure. i find your articles very informative. thanks</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on What&#8217;s Your Tax Issue? Home Built By Company by David Wilkenfeld</title>
		<link>http://thetaxissue.com/whats-your-tax-issue-home-built-by-company/#comment-70</link>
		<dc:creator>David Wilkenfeld</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Oct 2011 17:13:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thetaxissue.com/?p=1155#comment-70</guid>
		<description>If the taxable benefit is calculated based on the &quot;reasonable return&quot; method, then you would be taxed based on the method described above. That covers the capital investment made by the company. Then, if the company also pays expenses such as taxes and utilities, those amounts would also be taxed in your hands as a benefit over and above the capital portion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If the taxable benefit is calculated based on the &#8220;reasonable return&#8221; method, then you would be taxed based on the method described above. That covers the capital investment made by the company. Then, if the company also pays expenses such as taxes and utilities, those amounts would also be taxed in your hands as a benefit over and above the capital portion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on What&#8217;s Your Tax Issue? Home Built By Company by Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://thetaxissue.com/whats-your-tax-issue-home-built-by-company/#comment-69</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Oct 2011 15:38:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thetaxissue.com/?p=1155#comment-69</guid>
		<description>What do you mean &quot;plus expenses&quot;? Do you have to pay rent and cover all expenses?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What do you mean &#8220;plus expenses&#8221;? Do you have to pay rent and cover all expenses?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

