Showing posts with label Enough. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Enough. Show all posts

Tuesday, 16 July 2013

Are You Taking Enough Tax Deductions?

Even when anti-tax sentiment is running high, as it has been in recent times, Americans overwhelmingly accept the principle that filing an honest tax return is a civic duty.

Accountants say their clients often have a higher standard than the IRS requires. Some people will not itemize an expense when they cannot find a receipt, for example, even though not every tax deduction requires one. Estimates that conform to a "reasonable" standard are often adequate although some, like charitable deductions, must conform to a higher one.

Of course people are afraid of an IRS audit. But according to the 2012 Survey of Taxpayer Attitudes from the IRS Oversight Board, 86 percent say it's "personal integrity" that motivates them to be honest, and just 40 percent say they file faithfully out of fear of being caught doing something wrong.

To be sure, U.S. taxpayers don't skimp when it comes to claiming deductions. They list more than $1 trillion a year on tax returns. Still, accountants say they often miss obvious ones. Here are some ways people slip up:

Missing changes in tax laws. The tax code is not chiseled in stone like the Ten Commandments. In some years, there is not much new but in other years, the code can change significantly. The 2013 budget year was expected to bring big changes, but most were incremental. The top rate rises to 39.6 percent from 35 percent for the upper income bracket, which also faces higher dividend tax and a phase-out of tax deductions. Inheritance and gift taxes were added, but at relatively high thresholds. New or increased college tax credits and breaks for energy saving will soften the blow for many middle-income payers. Still, the tax code is as complex as ever.

[Read: Tax Time: Changes You Need to Know.]

"In general when people are preparing tax returns themselves, they not equipped to understand all of the changes in the law from year to year," says Gary DuBoff, managing director of accounting and financial planning firm CBIZ MHM.

Job-hunting expenses. With unemployment high, people are busy looking for jobs at all career stages. Even costs associated with an exploratory visit to a potential employer can be a deductible item. It's worth keeping track of all professional visits that might be considered job prospects. The IRS allows 56.5 cents per mile if you drive. But career re-inventors beware: One of the quirks of the tax code is that job searches outside your present line of work cannot be deducted.

Charitable work deduction. People at all ages, from teenage to retired, are doing more volunteering. Most people know to deduct contributions, but "a lot of people don't realize they can deduct expenses for their work," says DuBoff. They shrug it off as "just what I like to do." They can't deduct their time, but they can write off related costs such as transportation and supplies. You don't have to be a soup-kitchen volunteer to qualify. "Volunteering as a soccer coach or a class mom would also be a charitable work," says DuBoff.

Refinance point deduction. In this year's big wave of mortgage refinancing, most loans no longer require payment of points, the upfront interest charges assessed at the start of a home loan. But some people forget to take a deduction on points they still pay for previous mortgages, DuBoff says. When you extinguish your old loan, you repay remaining points all at once. That amount is entirely deductible.

Tax deductions vs credits. Not all tax breaks are alike. Be aware of the difference. A $500 energy tax credit might not seem like much, but it is what is known as an "above the line" item, meaning it lowers the amount of your tax bill on a dollar-for-dollar basis. Tax deductions are figured on your income tax rate. If you are in a 28 percent tax bracket, the tax deduction trims 28 cents from each dollar you deduct.

[Read: How Much Should I Contribute to My 401(k)?]

Childcare deductions and flexible spending plans. People often avoid this one because of the paperwork and hassle of paying "on the books" for a few hours of childcare here and there. But there are allowances that make it worth the effort. The childcare credit, an above-the-line item, reduces taxes by 20 percent to 35 percent of the first $3,000 spent for one child or $6,000 for two, depending on your income level. That credit can be used for parent care, too. The IRS also allows up to $5,000 for workplace flexible spending of pre-tax dollars for nannies, after-school care, and even day camps.

College and education. College costs are usually not deductible, but there are tax credits for tuition and a limited deduction for interest on student loans. Up to $2,500 in interest can be deducted if your income is under $75,000, or $155,000 for a joint return. A college credit of $2,500 for tuition and related expenses is available if your income is $80,000 or $160,000 for joint filers.

Retirement. One overlooked advantage of becoming self-employed, as many are in this era of non-retirement, is that you can use the SEP (Simple Employment Plan) to put 25 percent of your self-employment income up to $50,000 into a tax-advantaged employment plan. People who have had workplace plans often forget to set up their own. "That's a big mistake," says DuBoff. "It's a great chance to put more away."

[Read: 2 Simple Steps to Make Your Retirement Savings Leap.]

Tax deductions on taxes. Amid federal budget cuts in recent years, state taxes are picking up a larger share of the tax burden. Those payments are deductible. In states that do not have income taxes, sales taxes can be deducted. Even if you live in a state with an income tax, you might be able to opt to take the deduction for the sales tax paid. The purchase of a boat or a car in some states might generate sales tax that creates a larger deduction than income tax.

Storm expenses. Hurricanes Sandy and Isaac caused billions of dollars of devastation in the eastern United States. Storm damage can be a deductible item if it amounts to 10 percent of adjusted income. If you reside in an official federal disaster area, you can deduct those costs over a two-year period going back two years.

Beyond the fact that it's the right thing to do, being honest is a good guide. But tax codes are sometimes illogical. For example, there are virtually no tax breaks for people attempting career changes, but many for career advancement. So honesty and logic alone will not be enough. When in doubt, consult.

"If you are entitled to a deduction, I firmly believe you should take it," says DuBoff. "Even if you do not have a record of every expense, a reasonable estimate can work. But it can't be frivolous or way out of line." With the IRS increasingly relying on algorithmic filtering of electronic returns, those outliers quickly draw attention.

More From US News & World Report


View the original article here

Tuesday, 9 July 2013

Tougher EU penalties for cyber crime not enough, say security experts

The European Parliament has adopted a draft directive, toughening up the EU’s penalties for cyber crime, but security experts say this is not enough on its own.

The directive also extends EU rules that have been in force since 2005 to cover the use of botnets, the theft of online credentials, and the use of tools that enable cyber crime.

Anyone caught running a botnet of hijacked computers will face a minimum of three years in prison, and anyone attacking critical infrastructure could spend up to five years behind bars.

The directive recommends that criminals involved in some crimes should serve minimum sentences and aims to clamp down on corporate espionage by making companies liable for any online offences committed in their name.

The new rules say companies could be shut down if they hire hackers to attack rivals or steal corporate secrets, according to the BBC.

EU member states have two years to adopt the directive as law, but an existing, unofficial agreement suggests that some countries will not wait that long, according to US reports.

The changes mean the perpetrators of cyber attacks and the producers of malicious software can now be prosecuted, and will face heavier criminal sanctions, according to Cecilia Malmstrom, European commissioner for home affairs.

But security experts point out that tougher sanctions are meaningless if law enforcement authorities are not able to identify and apprehend those behind international cyber crimes.

They say the element of the draft directive that seeks to improve co-operation between EU states to investigate cyber crime is at least as important as tougher sanctions.

To apprehend the criminal masterminds, law enforcement agencies will need to have co-operation with local agencies all around the world

Etay Maor, Trusteer

One of the biggest challenges in bringing cyber criminals to justice is the fact that in most cases they do not reside in the country where the crime takes place.

“Unfortunately, in most cases the people who get caught are the money mules who may not even be aware they are committing a crime, not the bot masters or ring leaders,” said Etay Maor, fraud prevention manager at security firm Trusteer.

To apprehend the masterminds, law enforcement agencies will need to have co-operation with local agencies all around the world, he said.

“This is not an easy task. Cyber criminals know this, and this is why they usually reside in a country where they will stay safe from most western governments,” said Maor.

He believes that cyber criminals will be brought to justice only once tight co-operation between law enforcement agencies around the world is achieved.

“In the meantime, we have to make sure that users' devices stay malware-free and that organisations worldwide have a clear picture of what is targeting them and how they can mitigate the threat quickly and effectively,” said Maor.

Other cyber security experts have suggested that the tactic used by Microsoft, Adobe and others of disrupting the cyber criminal business model is also likely to be more effective than tougher sanctions.

“As long as the cost of data extraction is lower than the value of the data itself, criminal elements will continue to take advantage, irrelevant of the consequences,” said Gavin Millard, technical director for Europe at Tripwire.

“The suggested laws will do little to break these gangs, prevention being far more effective than restriction,” he said.

In January, Brad Arkin, chief security officer at Adobe, told the Security Development Conference 2013 in San Francisco that attackers are economically rational.

“They will always seek to minimise the cost and effort of developing an exploit to take advantage of software vulnerabilities,” he said.

Arkin believes that finding and fixing bugs is a waste of time because it is hugely expensive and there will always be vulnerabilities in code – attackers just have to find one to make it worthwhile.

Mitigation such as sandboxing, he said, is more effective because it changes the cost equation for the attacker.

Similarly, Microsoft’s digital crimes unit (DCU) has recognised the importance of shutting down botnets because they form the backbone of cyber criminal operations.

So far, the DCU, in collaboration with cross-industry partners, has taken down seven major botnets, effectively disabling key cyber criminal infrastructure.


Register now to receive ComputerWeekly.com IT-related news, guides and more, delivered to your inbox.By submitting you agree to receive email from TechTarget and its partners. If you reside outside of the United States, you consent to having your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States. Privacy$("a#eproductLogin").attr('href', function(i) { return $(this).attr('href') + '?fromURL=' + regFromUrl; });

View the original article here

Saturday, 6 July 2013

Study Suggests US Health Security Research Not Balanced Enough To Meet Goals

Main Category: Aid / Disasters
Also Included In: Public Health;  Bio-terrorism / Terrorism
Article Date: 05 Dec 2012 - 1:00 PST Current ratings for:
Study Suggests US Health Security Research Not Balanced Enough To Meet Goals
not yet ratednot yet rated
Federal support for health security research is heavily weighted toward preparing for bioterrorism and other biological threats, providing significantly less funding for challenges such as monster storms or attacks with conventional bombs, according to a new RAND Corporation study.

The findings, published in the December issue of the journal Health Affairs, come from the first-ever inventory of national health security-related research funded by civilian agencies of the federal government.

Researchers say recent events such as Superstorm Sandy, tornadoes in the Midwest and major earthquakes around the world highlight the need to prepare the nation's health care system for a broad array of natural and manmade disasters.

"Although disaster preparedness requires active involvement of the private and public sectors, the federal government is the primary sponsor of the basic and applied health research needed to develop new technology and strategies to prepare for and respond to large-scale disasters," said the study's senior author, Dr. Art Kellermann, who holds the Paul O'Neill Alcoa Chair in Policy Analysis at RAND. "Our study suggests the current mix of federally-funded national health security research projects may not be ideally configured for achieving the broad preparedness goals that face our nation."

RAND researchers were asked by federal health officials to conduct a first-ever inventory of non-classified, civilian national health security research funded by the federal government. Military research and internal research conducted by the agencies themselves was not included.

Beginning in 2010, researchers canvassed seven non-defense agencies whose research addresses topics relevant to the objectives of the National Health Security Strategy, a plan completed in 2009 to guide efforts by the government and others to defend the nation from a large-scale public health threats, both natural and manmade.

The agencies surveyed by RAND researchers were the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, the Department of Homeland Security's Science and Technology Directorate, the Department of Energy, the National Science Foundation and the Veterans Health Administration.

The studies identified spanned a 13-year period, with most awarded between 2003 and 2010 when there was robust federal funding for health security research. The final list totaled 1,593 unique research projects, most of which were funded before the creation of the National Health Security Strategy.

More than 1,000 of the studies (66 percent) were directed toward biological threats, including bioterrorism, emerging infectious diseases, foodborne illness and pandemic influenza.

Fewer than 10 percent of the total pool of projects addressed natural disasters such as earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes or floods. The remaining projects addressed threats that were chemical (8 percent), radiological (5 percent), nuclear (4 percent) or explosive (4 percent).

The existing research heavily emphasized basic laboratory research, a likely reflection of the large role of the research sponsored by the National Institutes of Health. Far fewer studies were oriented toward translating basic research into actionable practice, or evaluating promising strategies and techniques to confirm their effectiveness.

RAND researchers say the rationale for the current mix of research projects is not clear. In the course of the project, they observed that each of the agencies studied determines its research priorities with little or no effort to coordinate their decisions with those of other agencies.

"The officials we spoke with were not only willing, but eager, to engage in cross-department information sharing to help the nation develop a more-coordinated and efficient approach to health security research," said Shoshana R. Shelton, the study's lead author and a project associate at RAND.

In order to get more bang for health security research spending, RAND researchers recommend agencies employ a risk-based approach to priority setting that takes into consideration the probability of a threat occurring, the magnitude of damage it could inflict and the availability of countermeasures to limit or reduce its consequences.

In addition, researchers recommend a voluntary process of information-sharing between agencies to improve coordination, and a shared approach to track the progress and results of research projects. This would dramatically improve future efforts to inventory health security research projects and ensure that findings quickly reach the field.

Article adapted by Medical News Today from original press release. Click 'references' tab above for source.
Visit our aid / disasters section for the latest news on this subject. Support for the study was provided by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services through the Office of Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response. Other authors of the study are Kathryn Connor, Lori Uscher-Pines, Francesca Pillemer and James Mullikin.
RAND Corporation Please use one of the following formats to cite this article in your essay, paper or report:

MLA

Corporation, RAND. "Study Suggests US Health Security Research Not Balanced Enough To Meet Goals." Medical News Today. MediLexicon, Intl., 5 Dec. 2012. Web.
5 Jul. 2013. APA

Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.


'Study Suggests US Health Security Research Not Balanced Enough To Meet Goals'

Please note that we publish your name, but we do not publish your email address. It is only used to let you know when your message is published. We do not use it for any other purpose. Please see our privacy policy for more information.

If you write about specific medications or operations, please do not name health care professionals by name.

All opinions are moderated before being included (to stop spam)

Contact Our News Editors

For any corrections of factual information, or to contact the editors please use our feedback form.

Please send any medical news or health news press releases to:

Note: Any medical information published on this website is not intended as a substitute for informed medical advice and you should not take any action before consulting with a health care professional. For more information, please read our terms and conditions.



View the original article here