is it true that Canadian law only allows you to claim for the cost of 3 conferences a year that are business related?
Kind of. According to the Canadian Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA -- our IRS), we have a maximum of 2 conventions per year we can attend that are business related. This claim is substantiated here: http://www.ccra-adrc.gc.ca/E/pub/tp/...it131r2-e.html
The idea to get around this is to claim other expenses as educational or training. For example, Internext is clearly a convention. The upcoming show in LA can be considered educational since you're attending sessions to educate yourself of the industry changes.
There's a few other loopholes that CCRA is fucking me on like Island Gathering. Apparently you can only attend conventions within the territorial scope of your business and since I have no sponsors based in Curacao they denied my expense. I'm fighting their bullshit claims in court, so I'll let you know how it goes...
Kind of. According to the Canadian Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA -- our IRS), we have a maximum of 2 conventions per year we can attend that are business related. This claim is substantiated here: http://www.ccra-adrc.gc.ca/E/pub/tp/...it131r2-e.html
The idea to get around this is to claim other expenses as educational or training. For example, Internext is clearly a convention. The upcoming show in LA can be considered educational since you're attending sessions to educate yourself of the industry changes.
There's a few other loopholes that CCRA is fucking me on like Island Gathering. Apparently you can only attend conventions within the territorial scope of your business and since I have no sponsors based in Curacao they denied my expense. I'm fighting their bullshit claims in court, so I'll let you know how it goes...
WG
Damn the dude i spoke to said it was three 'legally' turns out he was wrong and it is actually two, that must suck.
No problem. This claim is really tricky to play with as well since there's no clear definition of what is a convention. Different dictionaries have different interpretations and its tough to tell what's a business meeting and a convention. I'm about to get very intimate with these CCRA motherfuckers in the upcoming few weeks. $20,000 in legal fees and rising so far. Fucking nuts, not that I'm bitter or anything...
Originally posted by Lensman Thanks Sleazy, it's gonna be a great event. The registrations so far have been tremendous. The I hope everyone else can make it.
Kind of. According to the Canadian Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA -- our IRS), we have a maximum of 2 conventions per year we can attend that are business related. This claim is substantiated here: http://www.ccra-adrc.gc.ca/E/pub/tp/...it131r2-e.html
The idea to get around this is to claim other expenses as educational or training. For example, Internext is clearly a convention. The upcoming show in LA can be considered educational since you're attending sessions to educate yourself of the industry changes.
There's a few other loopholes that CCRA is fucking me on like Island Gathering. Apparently you can only attend conventions within the territorial scope of your business and since I have no sponsors based in Curacao they denied my expense. I'm fighting their bullshit claims in court, so I'll let you know how it goes...
WG
conventions - marketing, business meetings, etc. they are legal ways around it
Originally posted by SleazyDream conventions - marketing, business meetings, etc. they are legal ways around it
Yup... unfortunately any gathering i called a convention and its too late to change that for 2000 - 2002 so I'm gonna have to pay for it there. From this year forward, everything is a business meeting... the cost of learning... Either way, the Island Gathering one is really bothering me since they won't recognize it and a few other GST problems, hopefully this shit will be out of the way so I can get back to work in a few weeks...
I ment you at the Webmaster Summit in Vancouver last Friday. I was there because I live in Seattle and it was only a 2.5 hour drive and I was already planning to attend SEGuru's SEO seminar any way. I stayed over for a day to meet some of the webmasters before driving home.
I had lots of fun and made some good contacts, but I'm not in the "adult" biz. I'm just looking for webmasters who have gambling or mainstream traffic that might convert for our online bingo site.
I'm wondering if it would be worth my time to come to convention in LA, or will it be strictly "adult" oriented and not very productive for me?
Originally posted by grogan I was fucking kidding. Shoulda just said spam.
the cp part was over the edge, sorry.
You don't kid about shit like that.People have been sued over that,it is called defamation of character .And being on a BBS making a remark like that is grounds for a lawsuit.
Originally posted by spunky1
You don't kid about shit like that.People have been sued over that,it is called defamation of character .And being on a BBS making a remark like that is grounds for a lawsuit.
Originally posted by spunky1
You don't kid about shit like that.People have been sued over that,it is called defamation of character .And being on a BBS making a remark like that is grounds for a lawsuit.
as in...your not a spammer or cp promoter..................
that ISN'T something you even CONSIDER kidding about.
you don't DESERVE to be here on GFY.
I'm asking to have you banned from this place, and if that doesn't work I'll get lens or eric drunk in LA and get some compromising photos on then to use to bribe them to get you banned.
you're on borrowed time.
This dog, is dog, a dog, good dog, way dog, to dog, keep dog, an dog, idiot dog, busy dog, for dog, 20 dog, seconds dog!
Even joking about stuff like this is extremely serious. Scott does not spam and would not be caught in a million years anywhere near CP or anyone who would deal with that shit.
Think next time about what you say before you say it.
well with you taking so much offense to his dumb fuck statement it makes me wonder. he's obviously just looking for attention or something (like my little annoying brother)
The insinuation of CP, whether said in jest or not, is so utterly insulting to those of us trying to make a living from this business full-time, that to make a comment like that is, well probably one of the worst insults one could make here. I don't see where Sleazy is over-reacting at all.
Originally posted by CDSmith The insinuation of CP, whether said in jest or not, is so utterly insulting to those of us trying to make a living from this business full-time, that to make a comment like that is, well probably one of the worst insults one could make here. I don't see where Sleazy is over-reacting at all.
Comment