VoIP Mailing List Archives
Mailing list archives for the VoIP community |
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
astmattf at gmail.com Guest
|
Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:38 pm Post subject: [asterisk-users] World Cheapest Predictive Dialer! |
|
|
Hello,
If you have a PRI-T1 in the USA, then you can set outgoing CallerID
with just about any carrier.
MATT---
On 6/17/08, Mark Hamilton <mark.h at cage151.com> wrote:
Quote: | How can they even set such 1234567890 callerIDs anyway?
For example, our inter/intra state calling depends a lot on the callerIDs.
-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Matt Florell
Sent: June 13, 2008 8:20 AM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] World Cheapest Predictive Dialer!
Hello,
I am not suggesting that the USA's laws exist outside of the USA, I
can imagine the horrible problems that would cause in the rest of
world. I wanted to point out that if you are using this service and
doing business in the USA that you could face penalties for not
following the law. According to the FTC, both companies(the scrubber
and the client) are guilty of breaking the laws of the USA.
If you are calling the USA and need to use this company's FTC DNC list
filtering services then you may have USA-based operations of some
kind. In such cases it is important to note that companies have been
fined millions of dollars and have been shut down in the USA for
violating these regulations.
I am well aware of the fact that companies based outside of the USA
routinely call-blast the USA with auto-dialers that send out callerIDs
such as 1234567890 and do no filtering against the USA FTC DNC lists.
A large portion of these companies are doing lead-generation for
USA-based companies, and over the years a lot of those USA-based
companies have been shut down for the activities of their lead
suppliers.
MATT---
On 6/13/08, Dean Collins <Dean at cognation.net> wrote:
Quote: | Yep it's funny how few people on this list realize that the usa's
borders and laws stop 50 miles off the coast.
It's also surprising how few Americans realize that a company
incorporated internationally (Pakistan in this instance) even if owned
as a subsidiary of a USA parent doesn't have to follow the laws of the
USA but actually falls under the jurisdiction of the laws they are
incorporated under.
I'm not saying this is good or bad, 'm just saying that as 'asterisk'
people we should be smart enough to play the laws that suit us to our
advantage, if you think that the Global 1000 companies don't then you
are kidding yourself.
Besides we have the advantage in that almost everything we do can be
virtual in most instances.
Cheers,
Dean
-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Steve
Totaro
Sent: Friday, 13 June 2008 7:06 AM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] World Cheapest Predictive Dialer!
My guess is that they are outside of the FTC's jurisdiction.....
Thanks,
Steve T
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 6:15 AM, Matt Florell <astmattf at gmail.com>
wrote:
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
|
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
stotaro at totarotechn... Guest
|
Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:54 pm Post subject: [asterisk-users] World Cheapest Predictive Dialer! |
|
|
I can set to anything on my Qwest circuit. All zeros or whatever,
just has to be ten digits. I have seen some that will send less than
ten like a four digit extension number on a misconfigured system.
Thanks,
Steve T
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Matt Florell <astmattf at gmail.com> wrote:
Quote: | Hello,
If you have a PRI-T1 in the USA, then you can set outgoing CallerID
with just about any carrier.
MATT---
On 6/17/08, Mark Hamilton <mark.h at cage151.com> wrote:
Quote: | How can they even set such 1234567890 callerIDs anyway?
For example, our inter/intra state calling depends a lot on the callerIDs.
-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Matt Florell
Sent: June 13, 2008 8:20 AM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] World Cheapest Predictive Dialer!
Hello,
I am not suggesting that the USA's laws exist outside of the USA, I
can imagine the horrible problems that would cause in the rest of
world. I wanted to point out that if you are using this service and
doing business in the USA that you could face penalties for not
following the law. According to the FTC, both companies(the scrubber
and the client) are guilty of breaking the laws of the USA.
If you are calling the USA and need to use this company's FTC DNC list
filtering services then you may have USA-based operations of some
kind. In such cases it is important to note that companies have been
fined millions of dollars and have been shut down in the USA for
violating these regulations.
I am well aware of the fact that companies based outside of the USA
routinely call-blast the USA with auto-dialers that send out callerIDs
such as 1234567890 and do no filtering against the USA FTC DNC lists.
A large portion of these companies are doing lead-generation for
USA-based companies, and over the years a lot of those USA-based
companies have been shut down for the activities of their lead
suppliers.
MATT---
On 6/13/08, Dean Collins <Dean at cognation.net> wrote:
Quote: | Yep it's funny how few people on this list realize that the usa's
borders and laws stop 50 miles off the coast.
It's also surprising how few Americans realize that a company
incorporated internationally (Pakistan in this instance) even if owned
as a subsidiary of a USA parent doesn't have to follow the laws of the
USA but actually falls under the jurisdiction of the laws they are
incorporated under.
I'm not saying this is good or bad, 'm just saying that as 'asterisk'
people we should be smart enough to play the laws that suit us to our
advantage, if you think that the Global 1000 companies don't then you
are kidding yourself.
Besides we have the advantage in that almost everything we do can be
virtual in most instances.
Cheers,
Dean
-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Steve
Totaro
Sent: Friday, 13 June 2008 7:06 AM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] World Cheapest Predictive Dialer!
My guess is that they are outside of the FTC's jurisdiction.....
Thanks,
Steve T
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 6:15 AM, Matt Florell <astmattf at gmail.com>
wrote: |
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
shmaltz at gmail.com Guest
|
Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 4:23 pm Post subject: [asterisk-users] World Cheapest Predictive Dialer! |
|
|
My questions was to the fact that JRA mentioned he knows at least 3
owners..... to which I asked if it was LLCs or other type of
corporations, since LLCs have different rules. What I mentioned about
it being illegal is for non LLC type of corporations, but for most of
the other types of corporations, while it's possible that it is
illegal for LLCs as well in some states I could understand that the
rules could be relaxed for LLCs as well. As far as the IRS goes i'm
quite positive that it's illegal for tax purposes, in other words it
cannot be counted as a business expense.
The way I understand this:
http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=146835,00.html
towards the bottom of the page, it cannot always be used as a business
expense. Correct me if I'm wrong.
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 12:21 PM, Steve Totaro
<stotaro at totarotechnologies.com> wrote:
Quote: | You are probably confusing corporate tactics to pay less taxes vs
corporate tactics to protect assets. The first does provide some
asset protection but is mainly to pay less taxes. The second is to
basically "hide" assets through totally legal LLCs.
Thanks,
Steve Totaro
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 12:00 PM, C F <shmaltz at gmail.com> wrote:
Quote: | LLCs?
On 6/16/08, Jay R. Ashworth <jra at baylink.com> wrote:
Quote: | On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 11:13:31PM -0400, C F wrote:
Quote: | Quote: | Happens in the commercial world all the time; it's a common way to "get
cash out of the corporation" -- a business's building is owned by the
corporation's owners, and rented to the corporation.
|
This is actually illegal in some states and considered a breach of
Fiduciary everywhere.
|
May be, but I know at least 3 owners of private corporations who are
doing it, and their auditors seem fine with it. I think that it
matters whether the corporation is public or not...
Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra at baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274
Those who cast the vote decide nothing.
Those who count the vote decide everything.
-- (Joseph Stalin)
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
|
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
|
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
mark.h at cage151.com Guest
|
Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 4:30 pm Post subject: [asterisk-users] World Cheapest Predictive Dialer! |
|
|
Yeah, but what do you get billed as? I understand if your callerID and the
called party is from within a state, it's interstate routing. If between
states, then it's intrastate, etc
The billing depends on the callerID you send.
So, if you send a 000-000-0000 clid to a 917 area code, what would the call
be routed/billed as?
-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Steve Totaro
Sent: June 17, 2008 4:55 PM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] World Cheapest Predictive Dialer!
I can set to anything on my Qwest circuit. All zeros or whatever,
just has to be ten digits. I have seen some that will send less than
ten like a four digit extension number on a misconfigured system.
Thanks,
Steve T
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Matt Florell <astmattf at gmail.com> wrote:
Quote: | Hello,
If you have a PRI-T1 in the USA, then you can set outgoing CallerID
with just about any carrier.
MATT---
On 6/17/08, Mark Hamilton <mark.h at cage151.com> wrote:
Quote: | How can they even set such 1234567890 callerIDs anyway?
For example, our inter/intra state calling depends a lot on the
|
| callerIDs.
Quote: | Quote: |
-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Matt
|
| Florell
Quote: | Quote: | Sent: June 13, 2008 8:20 AM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] World Cheapest Predictive Dialer!
Hello,
I am not suggesting that the USA's laws exist outside of the USA, I
can imagine the horrible problems that would cause in the rest of
world. I wanted to point out that if you are using this service and
doing business in the USA that you could face penalties for not
following the law. According to the FTC, both companies(the scrubber
and the client) are guilty of breaking the laws of the USA.
If you are calling the USA and need to use this company's FTC DNC list
filtering services then you may have USA-based operations of some
kind. In such cases it is important to note that companies have been
fined millions of dollars and have been shut down in the USA for
violating these regulations.
I am well aware of the fact that companies based outside of the USA
routinely call-blast the USA with auto-dialers that send out callerIDs
such as 1234567890 and do no filtering against the USA FTC DNC lists.
A large portion of these companies are doing lead-generation for
USA-based companies, and over the years a lot of those USA-based
companies have been shut down for the activities of their lead
suppliers.
MATT---
On 6/13/08, Dean Collins <Dean at cognation.net> wrote:
Quote: | Yep it's funny how few people on this list realize that the usa's
borders and laws stop 50 miles off the coast.
It's also surprising how few Americans realize that a company
incorporated internationally (Pakistan in this instance) even if
|
|
| owned
Quote: | Quote: | Quote: | as a subsidiary of a USA parent doesn't have to follow the laws of
|
|
| the
Quote: | Quote: | Quote: | USA but actually falls under the jurisdiction of the laws they are
incorporated under.
I'm not saying this is good or bad, 'm just saying that as 'asterisk'
people we should be smart enough to play the laws that suit us to our
advantage, if you think that the Global 1000 companies don't then you
are kidding yourself.
Besides we have the advantage in that almost everything we do can be
virtual in most instances.
Cheers,
Dean
-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Steve
Totaro
Sent: Friday, 13 June 2008 7:06 AM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] World Cheapest Predictive Dialer!
My guess is that they are outside of the FTC's jurisdiction.....
Thanks,
Steve T
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 6:15 AM, Matt Florell <astmattf at gmail.com>
wrote:
|
|
|
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users |
|
Back to top |
|
|
shmaltz at gmail.com Guest
|
Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 4:32 pm Post subject: [asterisk-users] World Cheapest Predictive Dialer! |
|
|
Reading up a bit more it seems that I could be wrong about that last
part with the IRS rules, and in fact that link is meant for the
property owner how to file this income, and nothing about the
corporation.
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 5:23 PM, C F <shmaltz at gmail.com> wrote:
Quote: | My questions was to the fact that JRA mentioned he knows at least 3
owners..... to which I asked if it was LLCs or other type of
corporations, since LLCs have different rules. What I mentioned about
it being illegal is for non LLC type of corporations, but for most of
the other types of corporations, while it's possible that it is
illegal for LLCs as well in some states I could understand that the
rules could be relaxed for LLCs as well. As far as the IRS goes i'm
quite positive that it's illegal for tax purposes, in other words it
cannot be counted as a business expense.
The way I understand this:
http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=146835,00.html
towards the bottom of the page, it cannot always be used as a business
expense. Correct me if I'm wrong.
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 12:21 PM, Steve Totaro
<stotaro at totarotechnologies.com> wrote:
Quote: | You are probably confusing corporate tactics to pay less taxes vs
corporate tactics to protect assets. The first does provide some
asset protection but is mainly to pay less taxes. The second is to
basically "hide" assets through totally legal LLCs.
Thanks,
Steve Totaro
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 12:00 PM, C F <shmaltz at gmail.com> wrote:
Quote: | LLCs?
On 6/16/08, Jay R. Ashworth <jra at baylink.com> wrote:
Quote: | On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 11:13:31PM -0400, C F wrote:
Quote: | Quote: | Happens in the commercial world all the time; it's a common way to "get
cash out of the corporation" -- a business's building is owned by the
corporation's owners, and rented to the corporation.
|
This is actually illegal in some states and considered a breach of
Fiduciary everywhere.
|
May be, but I know at least 3 owners of private corporations who are
doing it, and their auditors seem fine with it. I think that it
matters whether the corporation is public or not...
Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra at baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274
Those who cast the vote decide nothing.
Those who count the vote decide everything.
-- (Joseph Stalin)
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
|
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
|
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
shmaltz at gmail.com Guest
|
Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 4:39 pm Post subject: [asterisk-users] World Cheapest Predictive Dialer! |
|
|
If it shows up as the BTN on the CDRs then technically you should be
billed at the highest possible tariff. Whether your provider will do
that or not depends what they are charged. In general the provider/s
shouldn't use CID as the BTN and therefore you shouldn't be over or
under charged. Even in cases where the CID is actually passed along as
the BTN, the provider should still keep track of you by circuit ID
rather than CID, however when they have to pay their tariffs I am
assuming they will be charged based on BTN which they based on CID
that you set, which will in turn make them lose money IF they are
charged at highest possible tariff.
In conclusion, I don't know what you are charged because I haven't
seen your bills. I don't know if the providers actually have the
capabilities to do BTN different than CID (I am assuming they could),
and if they do have the capablity they should actually make sure that
the BTN is always set to what it is and not CID. If they don't they
should pass on any high tariffs resulting from that to you.
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 5:30 PM, Mark Hamilton <mark.h at cage151.com> wrote:
Quote: | Yeah, but what do you get billed as? I understand if your callerID and the
called party is from within a state, it's interstate routing. If between
states, then it's intrastate, etc
The billing depends on the callerID you send.
So, if you send a 000-000-0000 clid to a 917 area code, what would the call
be routed/billed as?
-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Steve Totaro
Sent: June 17, 2008 4:55 PM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] World Cheapest Predictive Dialer!
I can set to anything on my Qwest circuit. All zeros or whatever,
just has to be ten digits. I have seen some that will send less than
ten like a four digit extension number on a misconfigured system.
Thanks,
Steve T
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Matt Florell <astmattf at gmail.com> wrote:
Quote: | Hello,
If you have a PRI-T1 in the USA, then you can set outgoing CallerID
with just about any carrier.
MATT---
On 6/17/08, Mark Hamilton <mark.h at cage151.com> wrote:
Quote: | How can they even set such 1234567890 callerIDs anyway?
For example, our inter/intra state calling depends a lot on the
|
| callerIDs.
Quote: | Quote: |
-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Matt
|
| Florell
Quote: | Quote: | Sent: June 13, 2008 8:20 AM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] World Cheapest Predictive Dialer!
Hello,
I am not suggesting that the USA's laws exist outside of the USA, I
can imagine the horrible problems that would cause in the rest of
world. I wanted to point out that if you are using this service and
doing business in the USA that you could face penalties for not
following the law. According to the FTC, both companies(the scrubber
and the client) are guilty of breaking the laws of the USA.
If you are calling the USA and need to use this company's FTC DNC list
filtering services then you may have USA-based operations of some
kind. In such cases it is important to note that companies have been
fined millions of dollars and have been shut down in the USA for
violating these regulations.
I am well aware of the fact that companies based outside of the USA
routinely call-blast the USA with auto-dialers that send out callerIDs
such as 1234567890 and do no filtering against the USA FTC DNC lists.
A large portion of these companies are doing lead-generation for
USA-based companies, and over the years a lot of those USA-based
companies have been shut down for the activities of their lead
suppliers.
MATT---
On 6/13/08, Dean Collins <Dean at cognation.net> wrote:
Quote: | Yep it's funny how few people on this list realize that the usa's
borders and laws stop 50 miles off the coast.
It's also surprising how few Americans realize that a company
incorporated internationally (Pakistan in this instance) even if
|
|
| owned
Quote: | Quote: | Quote: | as a subsidiary of a USA parent doesn't have to follow the laws of
|
|
| the
Quote: | Quote: | Quote: | USA but actually falls under the jurisdiction of the laws they are
incorporated under.
I'm not saying this is good or bad, 'm just saying that as 'asterisk'
people we should be smart enough to play the laws that suit us to our
advantage, if you think that the Global 1000 companies don't then you
are kidding yourself.
Besides we have the advantage in that almost everything we do can be
virtual in most instances.
Cheers,
Dean
-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Steve
Totaro
Sent: Friday, 13 June 2008 7:06 AM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] World Cheapest Predictive Dialer!
My guess is that they are outside of the FTC's jurisdiction.....
Thanks,
Steve T
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 6:15 AM, Matt Florell <astmattf at gmail.com>
wrote:
|
|
|
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dean at cognation.net Guest
|
Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 6:57 pm Post subject: [asterisk-users] World Cheapest Predictive Dialer! |
|
|
Bzzzt I'm not an accountant, and don't play one on tv but you are wrong.
This only relates to the classification of the income as passive and has
nothing to do with can a director of a business shield himself.
Go pay someone $250 an hour and they'll tell you how it affects you and
stop wasting electrons on this sill email chain.
Cheers,
Dean
-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of C F
Sent: Tuesday, 17 June 2008 5:23 PM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] World Cheapest Predictive Dialer!
My questions was to the fact that JRA mentioned he knows at least 3
owners..... to which I asked if it was LLCs or other type of
corporations, since LLCs have different rules. What I mentioned about
it being illegal is for non LLC type of corporations, but for most of
the other types of corporations, while it's possible that it is
illegal for LLCs as well in some states I could understand that the
rules could be relaxed for LLCs as well. As far as the IRS goes i'm
quite positive that it's illegal for tax purposes, in other words it
cannot be counted as a business expense.
The way I understand this:
http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=146835,00.html
towards the bottom of the page, it cannot always be used as a business
expense. Correct me if I'm wrong.
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 12:21 PM, Steve Totaro
<stotaro at totarotechnologies.com> wrote:
Quote: | You are probably confusing corporate tactics to pay less taxes vs
corporate tactics to protect assets. The first does provide some
asset protection but is mainly to pay less taxes. The second is to
basically "hide" assets through totally legal LLCs.
Thanks,
Steve Totaro
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 12:00 PM, C F <shmaltz at gmail.com> wrote:
Quote: | LLCs?
On 6/16/08, Jay R. Ashworth <jra at baylink.com> wrote:
Quote: | On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 11:13:31PM -0400, C F wrote:
Quote: | Quote: | Happens in the commercial world all the time; it's a common way
|
|
|
|
| to "get
Quote: | Quote: | Quote: | Quote: | Quote: | cash out of the corporation" -- a business's building is owned
|
|
|
|
| by the
Quote: | Quote: | Quote: | Quote: | Quote: | corporation's owners, and rented to the corporation.
|
This is actually illegal in some states and considered a breach of
Fiduciary everywhere.
|
May be, but I know at least 3 owners of private corporations who are
doing it, and their auditors seem fine with it. I think that it
matters whether the corporation is public or not...
Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink
|
|
| jra at baylink.com
Quote: | Quote: | Quote: | Designer The Things I Think
|
|
| RFC 2100
'87 e24
727 647 1274
Quote: | Quote: | Quote: |
Those who cast the vote decide nothing.
Those who count the vote decide everything.
-- (Joseph Stalin)
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com
|
|
| --
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users |
|
Back to top |
|
|
shmaltz at gmail.com Guest
|
Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 9:24 pm Post subject: [asterisk-users] World Cheapest Predictive Dialer! |
|
|
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 7:57 PM, Dean Collins <Dean at cognation.net> wrote:
Quote: | Bzzzt I'm not an accountant, and don't play one on tv but you are wrong.
This only relates to the classification of the income as passive and has
nothing to do with can a director of a business shield himself.
Go pay someone $250 an hour and they'll tell you how it affects you and
stop wasting electrons on this sill email chain.
|
Like I said in the last email, I misread it and it has nothing to do
with if a director of a business may rent his property to his
business.
Quote: |
Cheers,
Dean
-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of C F
Sent: Tuesday, 17 June 2008 5:23 PM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] World Cheapest Predictive Dialer!
My questions was to the fact that JRA mentioned he knows at least 3
owners..... to which I asked if it was LLCs or other type of
corporations, since LLCs have different rules. What I mentioned about
it being illegal is for non LLC type of corporations, but for most of
the other types of corporations, while it's possible that it is
illegal for LLCs as well in some states I could understand that the
rules could be relaxed for LLCs as well. As far as the IRS goes i'm
quite positive that it's illegal for tax purposes, in other words it
cannot be counted as a business expense.
The way I understand this:
http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=146835,00.html
towards the bottom of the page, it cannot always be used as a business
expense. Correct me if I'm wrong.
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 12:21 PM, Steve Totaro
<stotaro at totarotechnologies.com> wrote:
Quote: | You are probably confusing corporate tactics to pay less taxes vs
corporate tactics to protect assets. The first does provide some
asset protection but is mainly to pay less taxes. The second is to
basically "hide" assets through totally legal LLCs.
Thanks,
Steve Totaro
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 12:00 PM, C F <shmaltz at gmail.com> wrote:
Quote: | LLCs?
On 6/16/08, Jay R. Ashworth <jra at baylink.com> wrote:
Quote: | On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 11:13:31PM -0400, C F wrote:
Quote: | Quote: | Happens in the commercial world all the time; it's a common way
|
|
|
|
| to "get
Quote: | Quote: | Quote: | Quote: | Quote: | cash out of the corporation" -- a business's building is owned
|
|
|
|
| by the
Quote: | Quote: | Quote: | Quote: | Quote: | corporation's owners, and rented to the corporation.
|
This is actually illegal in some states and considered a breach of
Fiduciary everywhere.
|
May be, but I know at least 3 owners of private corporations who are
doing it, and their auditors seem fine with it. I think that it
matters whether the corporation is public or not...
Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink
|
|
| jra at baylink.com
Quote: | Quote: | Quote: | Designer The Things I Think
|
|
| RFC 2100
'87 e24
727 647 1274
Quote: | Quote: | Quote: |
Those who cast the vote decide nothing.
Those who count the vote decide everything.
-- (Joseph Stalin)
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com
|
|
| --
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|