Ask Experts Questions for FREE Help !
Ask
    spayra's Avatar
    spayra Posts: 6, Reputation: 1
    New Member
     
    #1

    Oct 20, 2008, 11:26 PM
    Physical presence for a Tax Treaty
    I am a J1 Visa holder. I have signed the tax treaty. I joined on 15th November' 2006.
    I am going to resign on 13th November' 2008. Can I stay one more week in USA without paying back TAXes (being a Tax treaty) . I have valid Visa till 15th december' 2008.

    I was away from USA for 2 months in this period (15th Nov' 2006 to till date).

    I need this answer urgently. Thanks in advance
    MukatA's Avatar
    MukatA Posts: 7,110, Reputation: 176
    Tax Expert
     
    #2

    Oct 20, 2008, 11:45 PM

    Your country? Are you a researcher?
    spayra's Avatar
    spayra Posts: 6, Reputation: 1
    New Member
     
    #3

    Oct 21, 2008, 07:32 AM
    Thanks a lot for quick response.
    I am from India and researcher ( Post Doctorate fellow)
    AtlantaTaxExpert's Avatar
    AtlantaTaxExpert Posts: 21,836, Reputation: 846
    Senior Tax Expert
     
    #4

    Oct 21, 2008, 08:00 AM
    Yes, you can stay the extra week. You have met the spirit of the two year rule by resigning prior to the two-year anniversary of your arrival.

    The IRS is NOT going to impose the tax retroactive if you stay a few extra weeks to take care of personal issues and clear your apartment before returning to your home country.

    You can even take a few weeks to tour the country if you want.
    spayra's Avatar
    spayra Posts: 6, Reputation: 1
    New Member
     
    #5

    Oct 21, 2008, 08:23 AM

    Thanks. It is very helpful for me
    AtlantaTaxExpert's Avatar
    AtlantaTaxExpert Posts: 21,836, Reputation: 846
    Senior Tax Expert
     
    #6

    Oct 21, 2008, 12:03 PM
    Glad to help!
    The Texas Tax Expert's Avatar
    The Texas Tax Expert Posts: 310, Reputation: 7
    Full Member
     
    #7

    Oct 29, 2008, 05:49 PM

    I think you might need to be a little more careful here on some of the treaty interpretation.

    First, the 2 years begins from the time you entered the US, not when you started working.

    Second, the treaty refers to physical time in the US (2 years) not time worked.

    I'm not arguing whether you will/will not get 'caught' by the IRS. I'm looking at what the treaty (ie law) says.
    AtlantaTaxExpert's Avatar
    AtlantaTaxExpert Posts: 21,836, Reputation: 846
    Senior Tax Expert
     
    #8

    Oct 30, 2008, 10:22 AM
    TTE:

    Noted! But my advice is based on a conversation I had with an IRS representative from the International Tax Hotline. He noted that internal memoranda allowed for additional time in country for administrative matters like moving and vacationing with no tax consequences.
    spayra's Avatar
    spayra Posts: 6, Reputation: 1
    New Member
     
    #9

    Oct 30, 2008, 10:26 AM
    Ok, it means aftre resign... I can stay few more days to do other necessary things.

    In any sense, I am resigning before that mentioned date.
    AtlantaTaxExpert's Avatar
    AtlantaTaxExpert Posts: 21,836, Reputation: 846
    Senior Tax Expert
     
    #10

    Oct 30, 2008, 10:34 AM
    Yes, that is exactly what it means!

    It is always good to try to obey the "letter" of the law, as you never know how a particular IRS employee may react to the circumstances presented to him or her.

    That said, the general attitude of the IRS would be to allow you the extra time to take care of necessary details of moving without penalty.
    IntlTax's Avatar
    IntlTax Posts: 831, Reputation: 23
    Tax Expert
     
    #11

    Oct 30, 2008, 12:05 PM

    ATE, neither you nor Spayra can rely on conversions with the IRS. If the agent auditing Spayra were to read the Technical Explanation to the U.S.-India Income Tax Treaty, the agent would find:
    The exemption from tax applies for a period not exceeding two years from the date he first visits the Contracting State (the “host State”) . . . If a professor or teacher remains in the host State for more than the specified two-year period, he may be subject to tax in that State, under its law, for the entire period of his presence.

    Just as with any deviation from the letter of the law, you may not get caught. However, that is not a sufficient reason to advise someone that the law provides differently.
    AtlantaTaxExpert's Avatar
    AtlantaTaxExpert Posts: 21,836, Reputation: 846
    Senior Tax Expert
     
    #12

    Oct 30, 2008, 12:57 PM
    I assume you mean conversations.

    I disagree with your interpretation in this case. I noted the date and time of the conversation and name of the IRS representative, and have used such citations in negotiations with the IRS, though not on THIS specific issue.

    While I grant you that the IRS can repudiate the guidance of its own representatives, I have found that most IRS agents take a holistic attitude when it comes interpretation of tax treaty provisions. Most agents look at the INTENT and SPIRIT of the law, not the LETTER.

    Spayra clearly intends to meet the spirit of the law by stopping work before the two year period. He may even leave the country before the two-year time.

    Given these facts, it is counter-productive to frighten him into thinking he MUST be on that plane before the two-year time is up in order to avoid paying two years' worth of taxes retroactively.

    If he leaves by 15 Dec 08, he will NOT be in violation of the provisions of his visa and, in 99.9% of the time, he will NOT be expected to pay any retroactive taxes. To say otherwise is just plain WRONG In my opinion.
    IntlTax's Avatar
    IntlTax Posts: 831, Reputation: 23
    Tax Expert
     
    #13

    Oct 30, 2008, 01:34 PM

    My reading of the letter, intent, and spirit of the treaty is that "the exemption from tax applies for a period not exceeding two years from the date he first visits the" United States. I saw nothing in the treaty or the explanation of the treaty that discusses the period that he works in the U.S. Therefore, the date Spayra quits his job would have nothing to do with the analysis. Further, the analysis would have nothing to do with when his visa expires. Rather, the analysis would depend on whether he has left the U.S. by Nov. 15, 2008.

    The approach of using a fixed time in the treaty is consistent with other U.S. residency rules that have nothing to do with employment status. Under the substantial presence test you do need to be working in the U.S. at all to become a U.S. resident.

    ATE, where are you gleening this "spirit" of the treaty? From an IRS agent on the phone? The IRS is wrong in about 1 out of every 5 questions it answers over the phone. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d0651.pdf (page 26 of 57).

    I am not trying to scare Spayra; I am trying to make sure he understands what the law is and that if he doesn't leave the U.S. by November 15, 2008 that he may be taxed on his worldwide income for all of 2007 and most of 2008.
    AtlantaTaxExpert's Avatar
    AtlantaTaxExpert Posts: 21,836, Reputation: 846
    Senior Tax Expert
     
    #14

    Oct 31, 2008, 09:43 AM
    IntlTax:

    This is an issue we will have to just disagree.

    TTE and I had a similar disagreement last year which eventually resolved itself.
    IntlTax's Avatar
    IntlTax Posts: 831, Reputation: 23
    Tax Expert
     
    #15

    Oct 31, 2008, 11:11 AM

    Fair enough.
    The Texas Tax Expert's Avatar
    The Texas Tax Expert Posts: 310, Reputation: 7
    Full Member
     
    #16

    Oct 31, 2008, 02:39 PM
    Int'l Tax is right. The Treaty is very clear that the exemption from US tax applies for a two year period and that period is not tied to the employment period. If a person arrived a month before they began the employment, the clock would still begin running from the day that they entered the US.

    ATE's point is that the IRS tends to be lenient on how strictly the treaty requirement is enforced. That's fine, and that's worth mentioning but that is an act of grace and is not guaranteed by law.
    AtlantaTaxExpert's Avatar
    AtlantaTaxExpert Posts: 21,836, Reputation: 846
    Senior Tax Expert
     
    #17

    Nov 1, 2008, 07:40 AM
    You are both correct that the law is clear about the two-year time limit.

    However, I also know that the IRS allows extra time for moving, shipping of personal effects, etc.

    For this reason, I am going to ask the IRS for clear guidance in writing about allowing a "grace period".
    The Texas Tax Expert's Avatar
    The Texas Tax Expert Posts: 310, Reputation: 7
    Full Member
     
    #18

    Nov 7, 2008, 12:54 PM

    I will look forward to hearing the result. I seriously doubt the IRS is going to give you anything in writing. The law is clear - whether they enforce it or not is a matter of grace and I doubt they will give you a firm commitment in writing (in fact, I believe that they would be wrong to do so).
    AtlantaTaxExpert's Avatar
    AtlantaTaxExpert Posts: 21,836, Reputation: 846
    Senior Tax Expert
     
    #19

    Nov 7, 2008, 01:23 PM
    TTE:

    Keep in touch by email. I will be sending the letter for guidance late next week, and do not expect an answer until well into next year.
    IntlTax's Avatar
    IntlTax Posts: 831, Reputation: 23
    Tax Expert
     
    #20

    Nov 26, 2008, 07:17 AM

    I recently came across Rev. Rul. 69-236 which deals with the topic discussed above. This revenue ruling provides in full:

    The Internal Revenue Service has been asked to clarify its position in situations where foreign professors or teachers who are residents of tax treaty countries temporarily visit the United States for the purpose of teaching at a university, college, school, or other educational institution.

    All income tax treaties presently in effect, except the treaty with Trinidad and Tobago, contain articles that set forth the conditions for income tax exemptions for professors or teachers on the remuneration for such teaching. The exemption applies to remuneration earned during a period not exceeding two years from the actual date of the individual's arrival in the United States for a purpose stated in the applicable treaty article except that the article in the Greek treaty provides for an exemption for a maximum period of three years.

    The exemption applies to remuneration earned by the visiting professor or teacher during that two or three years, whichever period is applicable, even though the total period of his presence in the United States extends beyond such period. Except as otherwise provided in the treaties with Austria, France, Italy, and Japan, the exemption terminates if the visiting professor or teacher becomes a resident of the United States before the expiration of the two or three years, whichever period is applicable. The exemption remains applicable, however, as to income earned during the period prior to the date he becomes a resident.

    I looked at the 1984 U.S.-Italy Income Tax Treaty (not a treaty in effect back in 1969 when Rev. Rul. 69-236 was published, but a treaty with one of the countries specifically mentioned in the ruling). The Technical Explanation to the 1984 U.S.-Italy Income Tax Treaty provides:
    It is possible that an individual who meets the qualifications of this Article, including the requirement that the visit be “temporary” may remain in the other State longer than two years, in which case the exemption applies for the first two years of the visit.

    On the other hand, the Technical Explanation to the 2001 U.S.-U.K. Income Tax Treaty provides:
    If the two-year period beginning from the date of his arrival is exceeded, the exemption will be lost retroactively. Thus, if a person comes to a Contracting State for the purpose of teaching and stays for a period in excess of two years, the exemption will not apply for the first two years.

    From these examples, it is clear that the rule differs from treaty to treaty. As indicated in a prior posting above, under the U.S.-India Income Tax Treaty "[i]f a professor or teacher remains in the host State for more than the specified two-year period, he may be subject to tax in that State.. . " (Emphasis added). This seems to give the U.S. the "option" to subject the professor or teacher to tax retroactively.

Not your question? Ask your question View similar questions

 

Question Tools Search this Question
Search this Question:

Advanced Search

Add your answer here.


Check out some similar questions!

Substantial Presence Test - Days of presence under B1 status with no taxes filed . [ 3 Answers ]

Hello, If I take into account my stay in the US on B1 (business/visitor visa) status then I feel I qualify for being a Resident. However, I did not file any taxes before (I was specifically asked by my employer not to). Now I'm on H1B (since July 2007) and have filed through TaxAct online...

Presence of mind [ 1 Answers ]

how to increase the presence of mind while doing our duties

Presence test [ 1 Answers ]

What is the presence test? I am not sure If I should file 1040NR or a 1040. I was a student from January until may and now I am working with my opt since I graduated. I haven't left the US except for 2 weeks in January. What is the presence test?

Presence of mind [ 2 Answers ]

It is said "think twice before you speak" I don't know why despite being a good thinker I am not able to think and say the right things at the right time. Many times I happen to say wrong things and later realise I could have answered much better. Please guide so as to how can I solve this problem...

5 years of presence in US with F-1 [ 3 Answers ]

I am a bit confused about the 5 year rule, here is my situation: 2000 - I had a F-1 visa and I was in US for 21 days. This is the only time I used that F-1 visa 2001 - I got another F-1 visa for a different university and I stayed in US for 120 days. 2002 - 250 days with the F-1 visa from 2001...


View more questions Search