Form 1040

[Demosthenes]

Historical Forms 1040 from the inception of the income tax to today.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-prior/

[webhick]

Historical Forms 1040 from the inception of the income tax to today.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-prior/

The stupid in me is amazed for three reasons:
1. They got such a pretty scan of a form that's almost 150 years old.
2. The government really thought ahead by loading up their printing presses with Times Roman, Helvetica, and ZapfChancery fonts.
3. Their English has no English accent.

ETA: 1916 is amazing! So many vertical lines! SO MANY! SO CLOSE TOGETHER!

ETA2: Wait, why are they putting them online? Are they getting too many requests for tax forms from people who haven't filed in 150 years?

ETA3: A post so nice, I edited it thrice.

[Quixote]

I like the disclaimer from the preface to the 1864 form.

As it is not impossible that certain changes in the rates of income tax may be adopted by the present Congress, the rate to which any income is liable cannot now be stated.

[Famspear]

Note that the "1864" form is really for the tax year 1863.

The "Form 1040" designation began with the 1913 form. You will notice that the 1913 form is actually for the short period March 1 - December 31, 1913 (the Revenue Act of 1913, enacted in October 1913, taxed incomes only from March 1, 1913 onward), AND for the years 1914 and 1915.

For the tax year 1916, the Treasury began publishing an "annual" Form 1040.

A few years ago I purchased all this (and more) on a DVD as IRS Publication 1796, for about 25 or 30 bucks, if I recall.

Now, they're handing out many of these historical forms, right there on the web site, for free.

Hrrrmph!

[ArthurWankspittle]

I like the disclaimer from the preface to the 1864 form.

As it is not impossible that certain changes in the rates of income tax may be adopted by the present Congress, the rate to which any income is liable cannot now be stated.

Given the year, was that the northern Congress or the southern Congress?

[The Observer]

Here are a few answers:

Form 1 was a receipt for tax payments. .

Form 24 was a form for Enrollment to Practice Before the Internal Revenue Service.

Form 137 was a form for Record of Wholesale Liquor Dealer Reports.

Form 275 was a form for Application for Release of Wine, Spirits and Report of Addition to Wine.

Form 678 was a form for Special Tax Return: Application for Registry and Special Tax Stamp - Opium etc.

Form 867 was a form for a Stock Valuation Inquiry.

Form 1000 - Ownership Certificate - Used by a citizen, resident individual, fiduciary, partnership or nonresident partnership all of whose members are citizens or residents in connection with interest on bonds of a domestic or resident corporation containing a tax-free covenant and issued before January 1, 1934.

Needless to say, most of these forms are no longer used and were rendered obsolete or replaced by other forms. And for a lot of the numbers between 1 and 1040, no forms were ever assigned.

[webhick]

Needless to say, most of these forms are no longer used and were rendered obsolete or replaced by other forms. And for a lot of the numbers between 1 and 1040, no forms were ever assigned.

I feel cheated. Why no form 666?

[Famspear]

In my set of PDF files from IRS Publication 1796, I show over 3,300 IRS "publications", over 4,100 sets of "instructions", and over 11,700 forms (i.e., the Form 1040 for 2009 and the Form 1040 for 2010 are separate PDF files, and therefore separate forms, in this count).

[Demosthenes]

The Department of Labor has a Form 666.

Form 666 – Car Washing and Polishing Registration Application

I have no idea why I find that really funny. Just do.

[Famspear]

The Department of Labor has a Form 666.

Form 666 – Car Washing and Polishing Registration Application

I have no idea why I find that really funny. Just do.

It's another "make up your own joke" type of thing......

You know there's a joke in there somewhere.....

[Demosthenes]

Oh dear. I totally should have written that.

[Parvati]

i notic that 1864 says "and subject to an Income Tax under the excise laws of the United States" on dat last page. My friend toed my the income tax is excise tax - see.

thankin you

Good grief.

[webhick]

i notic that 1864 says "and subject to an Income Tax under the excise laws of the United States" on dat last page. My friend toed my the income tax is excise tax - see.

thankin you

Lorne, knock it off.

[Quixote]

i notic that 1864 says "and subject to an Income Tax under the excise laws of the United States" on dat last page. My friend toed my the income tax is excise tax - see.

thankin you

It is well established that the income tax is an excise. Does anyone know the point of that post?

[silversopp]

so you agree wit my friend? pay no tax long time now

Your friend believes that he owes back taxes from 1864!? That definitely would be a "pay no tax long time now" record. I'd hate to see the interest and penalties on that one...then again, since your friend appears to be some sort of long-lived fairy/glittering vampire type creature, he probably doesn't worry about such things. More importantly, you should probably spend more time finding friends that are real.

[webhick]

Does anyone know the point of that post?

Lorne's trolling under a sock puppet, which I believe is the point of any of auntie's posts.

[LPC]

It is well established that the income tax is an excise.

There are a variety of crackpot theories about the consequences of an income tax being an "excise." For example, Hendrickson (and his heroes/warriors) believes that an excise can only be imposed against a "privilege," specifically (in the case of the federal income tax) a "federal privilege."

The fact that this idea was soundly rejected by the Supreme Court in the License Tax Cases in 1866 hasn't yet sunk in (and probably never will).

[Quixote]

It is well established that the income tax is an excise.

There are a variety of crackpot theories about the consequences of an income tax being an "excise." For example, Hendrickson (and his heroes/warriors) believes that an excise can only be imposed against a "privilege," specifically (in the case of the federal income tax) a "federal privilege."

The fact that this idea was soundly rejected by the Supreme Court in the License Tax Cases in 1866 hasn't yet sunk in (and probably never will).

But you would think that it would eventually sink in that no one disputes that the income tax is an excise and that the wall they are banging their heads against stems from their confusion about what an excise is and what can the object of an excise. I guess I'm just a cockeyed optimist.