Most Active - Last 30 Days
Type: Posts; User: Perry
Search took 0.36 seconds.
To hell with the costs - it's the ethics (or lack of)
that's critical. Chasing under or over-payers: the
costs are likely to be much the same. If the IRD
wants (and it does ask) people to play...
Taxpayers Urged To Take Refunds Into Own Hands
27 November 27 2015
So there you have it.
Remember their old slogan: It's Our Job To Be Fair.
Another [failed?] prediction resur-
rection. See original post here.
Once more, it's time to exhume
the corpse of predictions past,
buried as it was, back in 2010.
Name parents as co-tenants and guarantors,
I think used to be Glenn's advice.
That's just the usual euphemistic claptrap that prevails around here.
The was-Hastings-now-HB-hospital is another BS example.
Might be wise to not ask you to expand on that remark. ;)
Highly likely. I drove that yesterday, heedlessly. But the
Hastings aerodrome is barely 5 minutes down the road.
Much the same for most Napier residents, seeking to go
to their airport.
And its airfield is many miles
away, on the west coast!!
So my recollection is awry - sorry.
I must've been confusing fines with tax.
I see there's lots of discussion about now, on
just how out-of-reach kiwisaver funds are.
I don't know how good they are: but the old Official
Assignee / Insolvency Service do aver they can be
of help in such cases.
Then there's the Summary Instalment Order option,
too. I don't know...
Or delusions of grandeur, more likely.
I'll let you know, just as soon as my crystal
ball comes back from the cleaners. ;)
Based on past events of a similar nature, the taxpayers will
get done by the IRD, rather than the said tax agent. Talk
about inequitable . . .
Will it ever get to 3%??
The old SAC rate was 3% fixed for the term of the loan.
That was probably back around the sixties or seventies.
Many or most don't. There's usually something about it on Rate Demands.
Maybe not specifically, but . . . .
I have the vague notion that the quoted bit of statute has been
mentioned in another PT thread, some time back. Probably in the
thread about rental WoFs.
How many people use sobriquets / nicknames on
faceache? Or isn't that allowed? (Supposedly)
Don't speculate! Read the RTA!
Note that the Act says that entry for repairs requires
a reason to be supplied. Showing tenants does not.
Well, not specifically, anyway.
My guess is that...
But - even if it was a one third share each, if
one contributed more it would still be a loan.
What difference that makes to tax deductibility?
Possibly not much, but I'm not sure.
I may be missing something, but would the matter
of disparate amounts of capital introduced have
some bearing on the question? If there is an entity
that owns the property, then, when one person...
You were expecting common sense?
From the ACC*? You silly, silly thing!
* Or any Council, for that matter.
The critical word there being eventually.