Nelsona-
Back in October 2004 you wrote
"I'm puzzled by the expression "covering the Canadian social security tax in certain respects". "
I will now resolve the puzzle for you: Canadian social security tax generates a US credit only to the extent set forth by the laws of the US.
-fresnarus
Foreign Tax Credit on 1040
Moderator: Mark T Serbinski CA CPA
It doesn't say the "laws" of the US, it specifies the "law" , the law on double taxation relief.
No country would sign a treaty where the "laws" of one country could unilaterally supersede it. And under miscellaneaous rules, the treaty spells out exactly where the US takes (and was granted by canada) exception to the treaty.
The Treasury department has specified that Socila security taxes pais to canada are "taxes", both generally and specifically for double tax relief. I'm good with that, since they are signatories.
Anyhow, you asked how this position was reached, and there you have it.
Deal with it as you wish.
Feel free to pay someone to agree with you.
No country would sign a treaty where the "laws" of one country could unilaterally supersede it. And under miscellaneaous rules, the treaty spells out exactly where the US takes (and was granted by canada) exception to the treaty.
The Treasury department has specified that Socila security taxes pais to canada are "taxes", both generally and specifically for double tax relief. I'm good with that, since they are signatories.
Anyhow, you asked how this position was reached, and there you have it.
Deal with it as you wish.
Feel free to pay someone to agree with you.
nelsona non grata. Non pro. Please Search previous posts, no situation is unique as you might think. Happy Browsing
The treaty itself says the laws determine how that paragraph is administered. Treaties are free to do that. Similarly, the congress frequently writes tax code that specifies that the treasury regulations will define the implementation of said code.
You have failed to give any treaty provision to support your position, and you've drifted from insuting personal attacks to pure sophistry.
It turns out that your bluster had nothing but air behind it, as is usually the case with bluster.
You have failed to give any treaty provision to support your position, and you've drifted from insuting personal attacks to pure sophistry.
It turns out that your bluster had nothing but air behind it, as is usually the case with bluster.