Discover Your Pot o' Gold...in Your Tax Deductible Vacation!

To contact us Click HERE



Dublin, Ireland 


Tim, who owns his own business, decided he wanted to take a two-week trip around the US. So he did--and was able to legally deduct every dime that he spent on his "vacation". Here's how he did it.

1. Make all your business appointments before you leave for your trip.
Most people believe that they can go on vacation and simply hand out their business cards in order to make the trip deductible.
Wrong.
You must have at least one business appointment before you leave in order to establish the "prior set business purpose" required by the IRS. Keeping this in mind, before he left for his trip, Tim set up appointments with business colleagues in the various cities that he planned to visit.
Let's say Tim is a manufacturer of green office products looking to expand his business and distribute more product. One possible way to establish business contacts--if he doesn't already have them--is to place advertisements looking for distributors in newspapers in each location he plans to visit. He could then interview those who respond when he gets to the business destination.

Example: Tim wants to vacation in Hawaii. If he places several advertisements for distributors, or contacts some of his downline distributors to perform a presentation, then the IRS would accept his trip for business.

Tip: It would be vital for Tim to document this business purpose by keeping a copy of the advertisement and all correspondence along with noting what appointments he will have in his diary.

2. Make Sure your Trip is All "Business Travel."
In order to deduct all of your on-the-road business expenses, you must be traveling on business. The IRS states that travel expenses are 100% deductible as long as your trip is business related and you are traveling away from your regular place of business longer than an ordinary day's work and you need to sleep or rest to meet the demands of your work while away from home.

Example: Tim wanted to go to a regional meeting in Boston, which is only a one-hour drive from his home. If he were to sleep in the hotel where the meeting will be held (in order to avoid possible automobile and traffic problems), his overnight stay qualifies as business travel in the eyes of the IRS.

Tip: Remember: You don't need to live far away to be on business travel. If you have a good reason for sleeping at your destination, you could live a couple of miles away and still be on travel status.

3. Make sure that you deduct all of your on-the-road -expenses for each day you're away.
For every day you are on business travel, you can deduct 100% of lodging, tips, car rentals, and 50% of your food. Tim spends three days meeting with potential distributors. If he spends $50 a day for food, he can deduct 50% of this amount, or $25.

Tip:The IRS doesn't require receipts for travel expense under $75 per expense--except for lodging.

Example: If Tim pays $6 for drinks an the plane, $6.95 for breakfast, $12.00 for lunch, $50 for dinner, he does not need receipts for anything since each item was under $75.

Tip: He would, however, need to document these items in your diary. A good tax diary is essential in order to audit-proof your records. Adequate documentation shall consist of amount, date, place and business reason for the expense.

Example: If, however, Tim stays in the Bates Motel and spends $22 on lodging, will he need a receipt? The answer is yes. You need receipts for all paid lodging.

Tip: Not only are your on-the-road expenses deductible from your trip, but also all laundry, shoe shines, manicures, and dry-cleaning costs for clothes worn on the trip. Thus, your first dry cleaning bill that you incur when you get home will be fully deductible. Make sure that you keep the dry cleaning receipt and have your clothing dry cleaned within a day or two of getting home.

4. Sandwich weekends between business days.
If you have a business day on Friday and another one on Monday, you can deduct all on-the-road expenses during the weekend.

Example: Tim makes business appointments in Florida on Friday and one on the following Monday. Even though he has no business on Saturday and Sunday, he may deduct on-the-road business expenses incurred during the weekend.

5. Make the majority of your trip days business days.
The IRS says that you can deduct transportation expenses if business is the primary purpose of the trip. A majority of days in the trip must be for business activities, otherwise, you cannot make any transportation deductions.

Example: Tim spends six days in San Diego. He leaves early on Thursday morning. He had a seminar on Friday and meets with distributors on Monday and flies home on Tuesday, taking the last flight of the day home after playing a complete round of golf. How many days are considered business days?

All of them. Thursday is a business day, since it includes traveling - even if the rest of the day is spent at the beach. Friday is a business day because he had a seminar. Monday is a business day because he met with prospects and distributors in pre-arranged appointments. Saturday and Sunday are sandwiched between business days, so they count, and Tuesday is a travel day.
Since Tim accrued six business days, he could spend another five days having fun and still deduct all his transportation to San Diego. The reason is that the majority of the days were business days (six out of eleven). However, he can only deduct six days worth of lodging, dry cleaning, shoe shines, and tips. The important point is that Tim would be spending money on lodging, airfare, and food, but now most of his expenses will become deductible.
Consult us before you plan your next trip. We'll show you the right way to legally deduct your vacation when you combine it with business. Bon Voyage!
Tim, who owns his own business, decided he wanted to take a two-week trip around the US. So he did--and was able to legally deduct every dime that he spent on his "vacation". Here's how he did it.

1. Make all your business appointments before you leave for your trip.
Most people believe that they can go on vacation and simply hand out their business cards in order to make the trip deductible.
Wrong.
You must have at least one business appointment before you leave in order to establish the "prior set business purpose" required by the IRS. Keeping this in mind, before he left for his trip, Tim set up appointments with business colleagues in the various cities that he planned to visit.
Let's say Tim is a manufacturer of green office products looking to expand his business and distribute more product. One possible way to establish business contacts--if he doesn't already have them--is to place advertisements looking for distributors in newspapers in each location he plans to visit. He could then interview those who respond when he gets to the business destination.

Example: Tim wants to vacation in Hawaii. If he places several advertisements for distributors, or contacts some of his downline distributors to perform a presentation, then the IRS would accept his trip for business.

Tip: It would be vital for Tim to document this business purpose by keeping a copy of the advertisement and all correspondence along with noting what appointments he will have in his diary.

2. Make Sure your Trip is All "Business Travel."
In order to deduct all of your on-the-road business expenses, you must be traveling on business. The IRS states that travel expenses are 100% deductible as long as your trip is business related and you are traveling away from your regular place of business longer than an ordinary day's work and you need to sleep or rest to meet the demands of your work while away from home.

Example: Tim wanted to go to a regional meeting in Boston, which is only a one-hour drive from his home. If he were to sleep in the hotel where the meeting will be held (in order to avoid possible automobile and traffic problems), his overnight stay qualifies as business travel in the eyes of the IRS.

Tip: Remember: You don't need to live far away to be on business travel. If you have a good reason for sleeping at your destination, you could live a couple of miles away and still be on travel status.

3. Make sure that you deduct all of your on-the-road -expenses for each day you're away.
For every day you are on business travel, you can deduct 100% of lodging, tips, car rentals, and 50% of your food. Tim spends three days meeting with potential distributors. If he spends $50 a day for food, he can deduct 50% of this amount, or $25.

Tip:The IRS doesn't require receipts for travel expense under $75 per expense--except for lodging.

Example: If Tim pays $6 for drinks an the plane, $6.95 for breakfast, $12.00 for lunch, $50 for dinner, he does not need receipts for anything since each item was under $75.

Tip: He would, however, need to document these items in your diary. A good tax diary is essential in order to audit-proof your records. Adequate documentation shall consist of amount, date, place and business reason for the expense.

Example: If, however, Tim stays in the Bates Motel and spends $22 on lodging, will he need a receipt? The answer is yes. You need receipts for all paid lodging.

Tip: Not only are your on-the-road expenses deductible from your trip, but also all laundry, shoe shines, manicures, and dry-cleaning costs for clothes worn on the trip. Thus, your first dry cleaning bill that you incur when you get home will be fully deductible. Make sure that you keep the dry cleaning receipt and have your clothing dry cleaned within a day or two of getting home.

4. Sandwich weekends between business days.
If you have a business day on Friday and another one on Monday, you can deduct all on-the-road expenses during the weekend.

Example: Tim makes business appointments in Florida on Friday and one on the following Monday. Even though he has no business on Saturday and Sunday, he may deduct on-the-road business expenses incurred during the weekend.

5. Make the majority of your trip days business days.
The IRS says that you can deduct transportation expenses if business is the primary purpose of the trip. A majority of days in the trip must be for business activities, otherwise, you cannot make any transportation deductions.

Example: Tim spends six days in San Diego. He leaves early on Thursday morning. He had a seminar on Friday and meets with distributors on Monday and flies home on Tuesday, taking the last flight of the day home after playing a complete round of golf. How many days are considered business days?

All of them. Thursday is a business day, since it includes traveling - even if the rest of the day is spent at the beach. Friday is a business day because he had a seminar. Monday is a business day because he met with prospects and distributors in pre-arranged appointments. Saturday and Sunday are sandwiched between business days, so they count, and Tuesday is a travel day.
Since Tim accrued six business days, he could spend another five days having fun and still deduct all his transportation to San Diego. The reason is that the majority of the days were business days (six out of eleven). However, he can only deduct six days worth of lodging, dry cleaning, shoe shines, and tips. The important point is that Tim would be spending money on lodging, airfare, and food, but now most of his expenses will become deductible.
Consult us before you plan your next trip. We'll show you the right way to legally deduct your vacation when you combine it with business. Bon Voyage!

Entitlement Cliff Ignored : Disaster For America

To contact us Click HERE
This is something that most of us that live in the real world knew before the a majority of the population reelected Mr Obama. Our economic situation must change if we are to survive as a free nation.

What's so worry-some now is that the majority, although small that voted for 'more of the same', must believe there is no problem with our entitlement programs, all we really need is to be told by someone they will fix the problem and it will be fixed. All is well. Pay no more attention, we are a path to recovery.

It's really amazing how many people in this country believe that just by hoping the problems will be fixed, saying that are fixed or hoping they will go away if they are ignored is enough. After 4 years of this agenda, we are still facing the same problems only they are worse, and apparently, reelecting the person the made them worse is a good solution.

Are the millions of people that voted in this election cycle truly believe this or are they just ignorant, badly informed or plainly stupid.

Why is this approaching disaster so clear to me, and others, but lost completely to so many others? This is not that complicated. Spend more then you make will always cause systems to fail. It's no more complicated then falling down, it's a fact you will hit the ground. 

The Coming Entitlements Cliff
Source: Merrill Matthews and Mark E. Litow, "The Coming Entitlements Cliff," Institute for Policy Innovation, October 30, 2012.

November 8, 2012
The fiscal cliff approaching at the end of this year pales in comparisons to the impending entitlements program cliff, say Merrill Matthews, a resident scholar with the Institute for Policy Innovation, and Mark E. Litow, a retired actuary and chairman of the Social Insurance Public Finance Section of the Society of Actuaries.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 108 million Americans live in households where at least one person participates in a means-tested program. The number has grown rapidly under the Obama administration.

•Medicaid has grown from 46.9 million to 56 million people.
•Disability beneficiaries increased from 7.5 million to 8.8 million.
•Food stamp recipients have grown from 32 million to 47 million Americans.

The budgetary challenges for these programs are enormous.

•For the 2012 fiscal year, the nation spent around $2.2 trillion of its $3.7 trillion budget on entitlement programs.
•The cost of entitlement programs plus the interest on debt is nearly equal to total federal revenue today.
•Everything the government does is on borrowed, or printed, money.

Who is going to pay for all these benefits?

•The $2.2 trillion expenditures for 120 million-plus entitled individuals translates to $18,000 per beneficiary.
•Moreover, an estimated 10,000 people are retiring every day. As the 77 million baby boomers transition from being taxpayers to net benefit recipients, the funding stream further diminishes.
•Sustaining this level of entitlement expenditure will only result in a reduction in work effort, reduced employment opportunities, and more people moving onto entitlements.

To solve this crisis, three things must happen.

•Entitlement spending must decrease: Benefits program must be reengineered into a real safety net, helping those who need it most without having to create economic incentives to remain on welfare.
•Policies that encourage economic growth must be implemented.
•Several programs must transition to prefunded personal accounts.

Fossil Fuels Can Save the Country : Millions of Jobs

To contact us Click HERE
How foolish is this - believing that energy production from fossil fuels will create jobs and build industrial infrastructureure. Why would we thinks this when we have wind, solar and biofuels producing 2% of our energy needs? That should be enough, right? It feels like it should work, and if it feels right, it must be right. Saving the planet should be enough for anyone.

That this thinking, and past achievements of progressives like Mr Obama and his agenda, has driven millions into poverty which is not a good thing, but then 'those people' will just have to endure the pain of their betters knowing what's best for the country. Best example of this policy is the coal industry.

That coal porduces more then 40% of our electircty isn't important, what's important is we have to move away from fossil fuels that are bad for the planet, this includes natural gas and nuclear as well. Nuclear power is just to scary. It just feels bad.

With electric rates on the rise and with no end in sight, with gas prices set to go over the edge along with food prices, what were those people thinking when they voted to insure our demise by reelecting the guy that brought on this nightmare in the first place?

Oil, Gas and Coal Can Prime the Jobs Pump
Source: Mark P. Mills and Yevgeniy Feyman, "Oil, Gas, and Coal Can Prime the Jobs Pump. Which States Will Benefit?" Manhattan Institute, October 2012.

November 8, 2012
America needs jobs, and needs them soon. The financial crisis of 2008 destroyed 8.4 million jobs. Since then, through a combination of public and private sector initiatives, only 4.4 million jobs have been added. The hydrocarbon sector (oil, gas and coal) alone could add over 4 million more jobs in the near future, say Mark P. Mills, a senior fellow, and Yevgeniy Feyman, a research associate, at the Manhattan Institute.

Policies that take advantage of the abundance of hydrocarbon can spark widespread employment growth.

•Ten million Americans are currently employed directly and indirectly in businesses connected to oil, natural gas and coal production.
•Hydrocarbon jobs ripple throughout the economy.
•For every hydrocarbon related job, six jobs are added in sectors from manufacturing to information services.
•By extension, in at least 20 states, jobs from hydrocarbon expansion equal one-fifth to three-fourth of all individuals counted as currently unemployed or underemployed.

Hydrocarbon jobs cannot be the sole solution to the nation's economic dilemma. But, they reflect the most promising opportunity for near-term jobs with minimum public interventions.

•The economic benefits that come from privately-financed expansions in domestic production would generate at least $2 trillion.
•In terms of monetary to social equivalence, each hydrocarbon job, on average, brings in $500,000 of societal benefit.

In the coming two decades, the U.S. Department of Energy observes that oil, gas and coal will supply 60 percent to 80 percent of world growth.

•Currently, 80 percent of U.S. and global energy needs are delivered by hydrocarbons.
•Barely 2 percent of contemporary energy consumption is met by green alternatives (solar, wind and biofuels).

Mills and Feyman insist we know where to dig, drill, build and ship, and can create millions of jobs using new technologies. Thus, the next important step is to implement policies that boost domestic production.

Energy Resource Development Hated by Progressives

To contact us Click HERE
Just the thought of have a successful economic plan that includes fossil fuels is out of the question for any progressive socialist Democrat. All anyone has to do to understand this is to review what the Obama administration has done in the last 4 years to our fossil fuel production.

Who voted for decline of country? The badly informed? The ignorant? The lazy? Oh wait, they are just those that are easily influenced and lead. The really bad thing here is there are so many willing to be part of the decline and their numbers are growing literaly by the day.

I wonder where all the people will come from that are willing to pay for this insanity.

The Myth of the Resource Curse
Source: Kori Schake, "The Myth of the Resource Curse," Hoover Institution, October 25, 2012.

November 8, 2012
As the United States becomes a major energy producer, will it become subject to the resource curse? Probably not. If the phenomenon really does exist, it flourishes in countries that lack strong institutions, governmental accountability, and already diverse economies, says Kori Schake, a research fellow at the Hoover Institute.

In economics, it is called the paradox of plenty: Resource rich countries tend to have lower rates of economic growth, and rarely mature into diversified and stable economies.

In political science, it is called the resource curse: Nations with economies revolving around specific resource extraction industries are more prone to civil unrest, authoritarian regimes and higher corruption.

•A World Bank study reports that primary commodity exports parallel with greater instances of conflict.
•Countries in which commodity exports account for 25 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) have a 33 percent chance of civil unrest; whereas, a similar country exporting 5 percent of GDP would have only a 6 percent chance of unrest.

Closer examination indicates that it is the nation's institutional quality that plays a bigger role. Countries with lower levels of development have the challenges of governance and societal violence that the resource curse prophesizes.

•The resource curse falsely attributes causation to a country's reliance on extraction operations, but this relationship is merely correlative.
•For instance, Nigeria is not badly governed and underdeveloped because it struck oil; it is just badly governed.
•By extension, reducing Nigeria's reliance on oil is not going to improve its development.
•Indeed, Norway is not becoming Nigeria because it is a major oil producer, and Australia is unlikely to fall under authoritarian regime despite its pursuit in mining.

Accountable governments, following the rule of law, are a better indicator of socioeconomic development. In short, governance, not industries, define the economic fate of a state.

•Therefore, the United States can capture promising economic benefits from being a supplier of gas.
•Trade balance will be altered as oil imports are reduced and gas has becomes a major export.
•Moreover, as oil declines as a percentage of U.S. energy consumption, Americans will have greater latitude in engaging with oil producing economies.

ObamaCare 'Death Panel' (IPAB) is Coming : Voters Approve

To contact us Click HERE
Lets call this what it is, Sarah Palin called them " Death Panels" and she is right on the mark!! Who voted for this? Who voted for Mr Obama and ObamaCare that supports this? It must be peole that don't care if their family members have to sent to early graves as they are worth the cost to be saved.

Again, who voted for this? Who is responsible for creating the 'death panels'? hmmmm - Oh wait - he's back in the White House for another years!

The Independent Payment Advisory Board and Access to Health Care
Source: Douglas Holtz-Eakin, "The Independent Payment Advisory Board and Access to Health Care," American Action Forum, October 2012.

November 8, 2012
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) creates a controversial panel called the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), which is in charge of cutting Medicare spending. However, there are several problems with it, says Douglas Holtz-Eakin, president of the American Action Forum.

•First, IPAB's mandate is too narrow and reductions are going to come from programs that represent less than half of overall spending in Medicare.
•Second, IPAB is unaccountable.
•Finally, the timeframe for cuts is too short. Cuts have to be achieved in one year, which rules out long-term quality improvements.

Furthermore, IPAB reimburses cuts in Medicare, which has two negative effects on Medicare and overall health care in the United States.

First, it would stifle medical innovation in many sectors related to health because IPAB determines what treatments get coverage and which ones don't. Moreover, the taxes on the industry would force companies to reallocate funding from research and development.

Second, providers will treat fewer patients or impose higher costs on other patients if reimbursements are reduced. Because IPAB creates uncertainty with regard to the payments that doctors receive, many primary care physicians are already opting out of Medicaid at an alarming rate. In effect, IPAB seeks to ration Medicare and make it more difficult to make appointments with doctors.

America : A Paradox of Agendas

To contact us Click HERE
It's not just our neighbors to the North that can see the insanity of progressive socialism, the entire world can see it and believes it will fail as all others that have tried it have failed.

But Mr Obama's agenda is based in hate for civil society and the democratic process. He believes those that have gain wealth and position by hard work and diligence have done so by taking from others.

It is his mission to correct this injustice by destroying the foundations of personal freedom by dividing the people into classes, those that have must allow those that don't equal access to wealth whether they earned it or not.

According to the progressive socialists, It is the job of government to make sure that the rewards of the productive are shared, by force if necessary, with those that do not have the same talents and or the same will to succeed.

Mr Obama was reelected by a very slim majority of voters. Still, it begs the question, why? Knowing full well what the last 4 years have done to this country and yet they vote for more of the same.

Are the majority of the citizens of America willingly ready to give up personal freedom for the bended knee and the out stretched hand? How sad we have come to this point in time given what so many have sacrificed for freedom and the America dream.

(author unknown, but no matter, this is good)
Got this list today and I just had to share it. It is from a Canadian journalist. Just felt y'all needed to be aware; don't be shocked....

1) Only in America, could politicians talk about the greed of the rich at a $35,000.00 a plate campaign fund-raising event.

2) Only in America, could people claim that the government still discriminates against black Americans when they have a black President, a black Attorney General, and roughly 18% of the federal workforce is black while only 12% of the population is black.

3) Only in America, could they have had the two people most responsible for our tax code, Timothy Geithner, the head of the Treasury Department and Charles Rangel who once ran the Ways and Means Committee, BOTH turn out to be tax cheats who are in favor of higher taxes.

4) Only in America, can they have terrorists kill people in the name of Allah and have the media primarily react by fretting that Muslims might be harmed by the backlash.

5) Only in America, would they make people who want to legally become American citizens wait for years in their home countries and pay tens of thousands of dollars for the privilege while we discuss letting anyone who sneaks into the country illegally just 'magically' become American citizens.

6) Only in America, could the people who believe in balancing the budget and sticking by the country's Constitution be thought of as "extremists."

7) Only in America, could you need to present a driver's license to cash a check or buy alcohol, but not to vote.

8) Only in America, could people demand the government investigate whether oil companies are gouging the public because the price of gas went up when the return on equity invested in a major U.S. oil company (Marathon Oil) is less than half of a company making tennis shoes (Nike).

9) Only in America, could the government collect more tax dollars from the people than any nation in recorded history, still spend a Trillion dollars more than it has per year - for total spending of $7-Million PER MINUTE, and complain that it doesn't have nearly enough money.

10) Only in America, could the rich people - who pay 86% of all income taxes - be accused of not paying their "fair share" by people who don't pay any income taxes at all.

"It is the greatest of all mistakes to do nothing because you can only do a little. Do what you can. Do all the good you can do, for all the people you can, as long as ever you can." - Rev. Sydney Smith c.1849

Climate Change A UN Global Fraud : China & India

To contact us Click HERE
Climate changers are they way they are as a function of an agenda to control population activities, not anything about what will happen to the country if the climate actually changes.

As I have stated many times here, it's about power and control, getting it and keeping, nothing more. There those that believe when the old Soviet Union collapsed, those in power had no where to go to continue their quest until they found the climate change agenda. Without much head scratching, one can see It was a perfect fit.

Reality? You decide.

Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States
Source: "Addendum: Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States," Cato Institute, October 31, 2012.

November 9, 2012
The Cato Institute recently released a report that includes details that were missed by the 2009 report from the U.S. Global Change Research Program regarding global climate change.

•The earth has experienced two warming periods in the past 160 years: one from 1910 to 1940 and from 1976 to 1998.
•Warming will likely be at the low end of reports from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) at only 2.9 degrees Fahrenheit.
•But, the global average temperature since 1900 has already risen by about 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit.
•Moreover, reducing carbon emission by over 80 percent will have no measurable effect on the global climate.

While the 2009 report stressed that the United States should cut emissions to avoid the devastating impacts of climate change, the Cato Institute found that this is simply not the case. To begin with, any reductions in carbon emissions would not be able to offset the output from industries in emerging countries like China, India and the rest of the developing world.

After including data that had been left out, the report finds that:

•Climate change will occur in the United States, but the impacts of climate change have little national significance.
•Water resources will be affected by climate change.
•Crop and livestock will adapt to climate change and maintain high yields.
•Sea level rises as a result of warming are easy to adapt to.
•Life expectancy and wealth are likely to increase.
•Climate change is a minor overlay on U.S. society.
•Species and ecosystems will change with or without climate change.

Finally, policies to curb emissions have little effect on global temperature.