Serbinski Accounting Firms

Yeah, you are unlikely to save very much tax, if any, by taking it out mid-year, but indeed, it is not very much money to be having to worry about for the next 30 years.

You are a good candidate though for a near-future 'transfer' to Canada, (for simplicity) so look at the thread on transferring ...

You had a choice, since you non-F1 days are insuffient to FORCE you to file a 1040, but (assuming you are Cdn) you could choose to file 1040 for the entire year, electing that your F1 days not be exempted.

If you file 1040 (or 1040A, or EZ), you do have to report all your world income including ...

You would need to do the calcs both ways.

The housing allowance would be taxable in Canada, without a doubt.

You could file a 1040NR, as long as you maintained closer connection with Canada (based on treaty article IV). This would mean having home and family in Canada.

Otherwise, there is no way ...

Not sure what 2 options you've indicated.

The only 'two' options I know of are:

using 1116 to report to claim the 25% tax as a CREDIT,
You always report ALL of the 25%, and let the form determine what the most you can use is.

or

Using Schedule A and using the 25% tax (again, all of it) as a ...

I am unfamilair with 'tax-free housing'.

I'm quite sure either IRS or CRA would view this as a taxable benefit, so it wouldn't matter what your tax residency was: it would be taxable.

Perhaps other can shed more light on such an arrangement.

<i>nelsona non grata... and non pro</i>

Joe: 2 things you've said troubled me:

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I already filed my taxes in canada as I normaly do,<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

For 2004 ...

This is often the recommendation of many cross-border experts.

Certainly, if it a smaller ammount, and your departure situation is that you can pull it out at the beginning of the calendar year, just before you return to Canada, and have little other US income that year, this can make sense. Even ...

rhollan,

I will continue to answer question how I see fit, not you.

You are free to do the same.



<i>nelsona non grata... and non pro</i>

You cannot easily use software for the first year taxes, since you at least need to (a) file a 1040NR (unavailable in package) and or file a W-7 for her ITIN, along with your return.

You certainly will not be able to e-file this year.



<i>nelsona non grata... and non pro</i>

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Isn't there any way to reduce this Quebec tax burden? This is nuts.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Not really. Have your wife ...

OK big boy, give me your hand (again).

Go to IRS.gov

enter 8833 in the search

Look at the <b>first entry</b> on the hit list...

and presto, the list of whens and when-nots.


Theres a good lad. I hope you can make it all the way back from so deep in the woods.


I guess I should apologize for ...

1. she is a resident until JUly 31st, at which time she will depart and become non-resident, writing Jul 31 on her tax return.

2. You are (IMO) a deemed non-resident until July 31, at which time you will be come non-resident. This means that you file as a deemed non-resident from the time you left ...

My advice is short on details here because I have already posted them dozens of times both on this site and on grasmick... the advice I have given you has been very detailed. Too detailed, in fact.

California will tax your RRSPs by their own rules, so probaly not.

Interestingly, if you held these bonds outside your RRSP, they would not be taxed in Canada at all, since cap gains for US residents aren't taxed in Canada, and Gov't bond interest is not taxable in Canada for US residents by treaty ...

No.

The taxation of RRSPs is very unclear.

If a state wishes to tax RRSPs (as California does) they will make it very clear (as California has), and will provide for time to comply with any current ruling.


Tax deliquency might be a reason to deport (I doubt it), but that is not the same as being ...