Adil Najam
![]("/images/Benazir-Musharraf-Deal.jpg")
Benazir Bhutto says that it is now time to take the ‘risk’ of going back to Pakistan. Gen. Musharraf says that he expects to be elected for another term as President. Pundits seem sure that a deal is not only on the cards but is done. Some do wonder if it is merely another detraction tactic by the military government, but others argue that it may be a step – even if a tiny one – towards democracy.
But while most have been caught in the ‘Deal or No Deal’ question, we at ATP asked our readers whether such a deal – if made – would be good for Pakistan or not. As many as 654 of our readers spoke. And quite unambiguously.
In response to our question – "What would a benazir-Musharraf Deal Mean for Pakistan?" – as many of 84% (547 votes) of respondents say that it would either make no difference (‘Same old stuff’; 41%, 268 votes) or would actually make things worse (43%, 279 votes). Only 16% (16%, 107 votes) believe that such a deal would actually makes things better.
The result is surprising in how stark, clear and unambiguous it is. This is unusual for ATP Polls which have usually tend to show a divided viewpoint. The one exception had been the Poll on Chief Justice issue. Most other Polls – on ‘Grading General Musharraf‘, on ‘Who did the Most Good for Pakistan‘, on ‘What Gen. Musharraf Should Do about his Uniform‘ – had yielded rather divided views.
So, what is going on here? Why this sudden unanimity amongst our readers who tend not to be in such agreement on most issues?
Could it be just a high level of cynicism? Or is it that our readers tend to be more urban and come from cohorts that have tended not to be major BB supporters? Or – as some have said – those who come here are from a so-called ‘drawing room’ class? Or is it that our readers have a better sense of the pulse of the nation that political pundits do?
Planning around the new estimated tax rules.
The Tax Adviser July 1, 1992 | Morrow, Gregory E. go to web site estimated tax payments
Beginning in 1992, certain high income individuals are no longer allowed to use the 100% of prior year tax safe harbor for making estimated tax payments. (For a detailed discussion of the new rules, see Luchs, “New Rules for Estimated Tax Payments” (TTA, Apr. 1999., at 203).) However, other opportunities still exist for individuals to defer payments of estimated tax during the year.
Sec. 6654(g)(1) deems wage withholdings as being paid equally on each installment due date (unless the taxpayer establishes the actual withholding date). Thus, any underpayments of estimated tax in the first, second or third quarters could be covered retroactively through increases in wage withholdings at year-end. (This assumes, of course, that the individual is approximately equally underpaid in each of these quarters.)Although this technique is not as effective a deferral as the 100% safe harbor, an individual subject to the new rules can defer payment of estimated tax on income not subject to withholding (e.g., capital gains, income from passthrough entities, etc. ) by increasing wage withholdings at year-end.
Accordingly, individuals who expect to be subject to the new rules in the current year due to the occurrence of a significant taxable transaction can defer estimated tax payments on the transaction by completing it as late as possible in the current year. In most cases economic considerations will determine when a transaction will be completed, however, when a transaction is expected to be completed near the end of a month preceding an installment due date (i.e., May 31 or August 31), the taxpayer may want to consider postponing the transaction [if possible) until after the end of such month. By doing so the taxpayer may be able to meet the annualization exception for the quarter and, thus, defer the payment of estimated tax on the transaction by three or four months.
Thus, with careful planning, the effects of the new estimated tax rules can sometimes be mitigated and/or avoided. But the new rules add considerable complexity to estimated tax payment computations, and the cost/benefit relationship of planning around them has to be considered. Note: As this item went to press, additional changes to the individual estimated tax payment rules are being considered. Practitioners are advised to watch for further developments that could affect 1992 estimated tax payments. site estimated tax payments
From Gregory E. Morrow, CPA, Pittsburgh. Penn.
Morrow, Gregory E.
![]("/images/Benazir-Musharraf-Deal-Pakistan.jpg")
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
Digg
YouTube
Benazir Bhutto was feted as a symbol of modernity and fought a long battle against corruption allegations
RIP Benazir Buto. Macedonia is with palestinia people.
Short and bold, as are muslims and believe in Almighty Allah and His Prophet (peace be upon him), who clearly said that if the head of the state of a nation is woman, then they will never see the success, which means that woman should never be allowed to become a head of the state of of country where the people believe in Qurna and the Prophet Mohammad peace be upon him.
Regarding the deal of Benazir with Mr.Musharraf, which mean that he wants her to be prime minister. She served this post twice and what she did with the situations in Karachi and did anyone see any development or progress in her era of two terms. Her father turned the country to socialism and factories & the businesses were closed even destroyed. Just ask the owner of any of those factories who established them with their blood and swept and that man wiped them away like water of flood wiped away the buildings. Very sad for our public that every one is playing with them by different ways. If it is order of some foreign power that she must be the future prime minister of Pakistan, then where is democracy, she is just fixed by some one.
enough to understand. Shahid – Canada
Imtiaz,
@you are not wrong !
from october till now, the picture is clear !
bush,mush and pinky.
perfect sandwich
i cry for those who lost their life for nothing. in any muslim country today’s democracy is not possible.
Go back to Hazrate Ummar (ra).
That concept is required.
I fail to understand as to why the contents of the deal are not being revealed to the people of Pakistan. The deal will ultimately effect the teeming millions who are, in any event, sick and tired of Musharraf, his corrupt generals and, of course, the wretched politicians that he has gathered around him. Why would the nation not get to know what is going on between Benazir and Musharraf is a question that begs for an answer? What is the rationale of the secret parleys that are going on for months now?
All things considered, whereas Musharraf is an insecure, power hungry overgrown baby who perhaps wants everything and doesn’t want to let go of anything. Benazir, on the other hand, is a hopeless, greedy feudal who is ever-ready to put at stake the national interests for the sake of her own petty and parochial interests. Her recent statements are a clear testimony of this contention.
Musharraf’s appointment of General Kiyani is yet step toward securing the walls of his dictatorship. Kiyani has been his closest ally for years now and it is believed that he shall remain so even if Musharraf does finally doff his uniform. On the other hand, things can change abruptly as well and tables can be turned
Mush weds BiBi