Serbinski Accounting Firms

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 aud...

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I wonder if you can elect to file as full year residents, be taxable on world-wide income, and use the Canada/U.S. tax treaty to your advantage to use the FEIE to exclude Canadia...

I should warn you that since you moved to US during 2004, you cannot simply file a regular 1040, using the standard deduction, unless you also report ALL your income form the whole year, including you and your wife's Cdn income. Otherwise you are not entitled to standard deduction, and MUST file mar...

Pretty embarrassing that an IRS phoneline (notorious for not knowing anything -- call back six times and I bet you get a differnt answer each time) was able to throw a dart and give you a better answer than your pro.

Move on.


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

Your 'expert' is wrong, TWO ways. First, as you indicated, the IRS allows by its own rules for you to do it. The otherwise qualified refers to the physical presence tests for FEIE, which your wife likely qualifies for. Second, as I have previously outlined, even if the IRS didn't allow it, the treat...

See the accountants who screwed you, tell them to fix it, then gert a lawyer if they don't.

and stop inserting quotes of my entire replies... I know what I said.

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

Yes. Each and every one whether or not you wish to defer US taxation on its generated income. Most people moving to US (or US citizens living in Canada) try to consolidate into 1 or 2 accounts. If you are filing 1040 on paper, there is no need to wait to send 8891. Only if you e-file do you need to ...

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">- I file in Canada stating my income whatever I earned while I was there. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"> You file according to the i...

You can be considered to have left in June, and would indicte this on your 2004 Cdn return, including Cdn income and nO US income earned after June. Get the "Emigrants" guide from CRA to see what obligations you have in order to be considered non-resident. The fact that your wife stayed in Canada a ...

Many people, including your accountants, incorrectly think that reporting income in one place means that they don't need to report it elsewhere. This is incorrect. Whether or not her income was or was not included somewhere doesn't change her reporting responsibilities in BOTH countries. Having H1 d...

Article II, par. 1

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

8891 is for 2004 ONLY.

You will need to file statements for previous years if you wish to catch-up.

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

Are there choices in canada? I thought there was only one.

I've even used u-file, completely online and it is quite accurate, for both QC returns for my folks, and 217 returns, which is pretty specific.

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