that is not the law

來源: caliber 於 2008-11-03 22:20:38 [] [博客] [舊帖] [給我悄悄話] 閱讀數 : (550 bytes)
回答: another more realistic example 由 caliber 於 2008-11-03 15:42:52

the book is misleading. "accident and health insurance proceeds" in that list actually means "accident and health insurance benefits provided by your employer". Totally different from the proceeds from her own auto-insurance.

anyway, the end result may be that she would not need to pay tax on the insurance payment. so it doesn't matter in this case. I just don't agree with you that what you said is the rule that will govern every time. I know the principle of gross income, and it is more complicated than you said above.

所有跟帖： 

• 唉。IRS是對GROSS INCOME 征稅的。如果你要弄清楚 -戰車上的狸花- ♀ 給 戰車上的狸花 發送悄悄話 (400 bytes) () 11/03/2008 postreply 23:09:04

• 我確實是為了較汁兒而較汁兒， 為了絞湖而絞湖 -caliber- ♂ 給 caliber 發送悄悄話 caliber 的博客首頁 (591 bytes) () 11/04/2008 postreply 09:47:15

請您先登陸，再發跟帖！