My W-2's in those years are both approax. 2,800. In theory, I could file for those years and take the EIC for more refunds, right? What is more upsetting to the IRS, being a non-filer or filing solely to take a refund?
Follow up question: I applied for a tax examiner position and will be going in with my documentation soon. With my head held high I will submit one form stating I did not file in '04 or '05. Actually, this is now a two part question: Is this foolish of me to do? and would not filing totally trash my chances of becoming a tax examiner this season?
2007-12-27 16:16:57 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Business & Finance ➔ Taxes ➔ United States
From your information, you were not required to file a tax return in 2004 or 2005. But, file and get your EIC. You have until April 15, 2008 to file for a refund from 2004.
You did nothing incorrect in not filing, so you can state that you were not required to file in 2004 or 2005.
The IRS is not upset if you don't file if not required to file, or if you file only for a refund. Both are correct.
2007-12-27 16:28:59 · answer #1 · answered by ninasgramma 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If you had a refund coming for 2004 and 2005, the IRS doesn't really care whether you ever file or not - they're not going to come after you to file unless you owe them money. And if your W-2's for those years are that low, you weren't legally required to file. The IRS isn't going to be upset whichever way you decide to go, file or not.
Not sure what you mean by tax examiner position. Working for the IRS? Even then, if you didn't file but were not required to because your income was so low, it shouldn't be a problem.
2007-12-27 16:32:26 · answer #2 · answered by Judy 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
i actually would not pass to H&R Block i might the two seek for an Accountant or greater useful yet pass the IRS construction itself to help you document.. the IRS does have a value plan which you would be able to join into and that they could help you document that besides. there will be returned effects and previous due submitting fees and so on.. however the longer you wait the greater you would be in threat for greater extreme problems. yet i would not complication as much as having all the money up front to pay to the IRS i might jsut get your self downthere ASAP to start recitying it. final time I had a value plan with the IRS they allowed the money over a 2 3 hundred and sixty 5 days era. That grew to become right into some years returned so i'm uncertain if that has greater beneficial or stayed a similar. With the hot little one & baby you may had a reimbursement in 06 so which you won't be as undesirable as you think of. solid luck !!
2016-12-11 14:33:05 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If your income is below the amount required for filing it is up to you whether or not you file.
If you have applied for an IRS job, your last two tax returns will be audited and scrutinized closely. If you are not required to file, you should be prepared to explain this.
2007-12-27 16:44:45 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
If your income was $2800, then you didn't have a filing requirement. This can be verified by the IRS by checking the wage and income statements.
(The IRS does hold it against you if you had a filing requirement and didn't file because you figured you had a refund, no big deal.)
2007-12-27 16:38:28 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
File today. Get your money. Why give it away? File your taxes on time and you wouldn't have this problem. You will probably get all of your tax withholdings for those years back as well. Do not forget your state taxes either.
2007-12-27 23:04:09 · answer #6 · answered by Gary 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋