TAX CUTS - IS THIS FOR REAL?

“I saw this article on CNN. Is something we should hold our breath for?

http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/06/07/taxcuts.glance.ap/index.html”

“Where you been, son? When you'll get your refund is all according to your name. I should get mine towards the end of August. I plan on donating it to Tom Terrific and his shelter for wayward liberals.”

“this is the first I heard of it. I bet Campmor and REI are licking their chops!”

“Actually, your refund date is according to the last two digits of your Social Security number. If you are a -90 to -99 you have to wait until September to get your check.”

“Yes..... electing a republican to the presidency and congress = more money for you, and less wasted on programs that don't work.”

“Oh BS Read on fellas--the tax bill is a big stinking mess. My mother says are like boys on the playground--they care more about who "won" than about what they do to the country.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101010611-128937,00.html”

“I want to see all you liberal A-holes sending your check back to the Treasury Department. Kleety, you need to send in your check plus an extra grand for being such a weenie.”

“Hey--it is not just liberals that think it is a mess. Read some more bacpac. Read someplace else. Wall Street hates it because it is so slipery no one can figure it out. I heard the other day there are huge training sessions going on for accountants to figure out the 4000 new pages of tax law it spawned.”

“If somebody poops in Washington, it generates 4,000 new pages of tax law.”

“You're right, gordon. I'm very confused. But I do know that the evil forces of government spending have been held in check for a while.

Bacpac, kleetn's a Jesus freak. He'll be giving his refund to the church.”

“they have to put a lot of big words in it to keep the liberals from understanding it and screwing with it.”

“Yes, the companies that do tax seminars for accountants are gleefully sending out notices, hoping to draw panicked accountants on-mass to their expensive seminars. Could we just throw all code out and start over? I do the tax return for the elementary school PTA, and the book of instructions is a half inch thick. This is for a non-taxable entity selling giftwrap and 50-50 raffles.”

“Lyndy, See, the tax cut is already stimulating the economy.”

“Okay, boys and girls, time to go hiking.”

“arclite- I thought kleetn was putting his toward the nut fund for undernourished squirrels. Then again, none of kleetn's squirrels look like they're at a loss for nuts.”

“plus, they get all of the fromunda cheese that they can eat!”

“I am sending my refund check to my good friend Mr. IRA Roth.

Nobody needs to get all worked up over this tax cut placebo.
All laws have a 10 year projection period -- meaning the long term fiscal effects are analyzed for year 2011. The tax scheme presented such a bad economic picture in year 2011 congress 'balanced the books' by sunsetting the law in 2010.

Basically , both parties just stone-faced lied to the American people.”

“I dont care I just cant wait for my 600 bucks to come in the mail. I get mine Sept 13th.”

“now we know how these polititions stay in power.”

“Yup”

“The smart consumer won't spend it.

You'll need it for the tax increase in 2005 after the next presidential election.”

“Gordon, you, the smart consumer, must have purchased enough gear to last until the year 2005.”

“http://www.worldnetdaily.com/frame/direct.asp?SITE=www.detnews.com/2001/politi

cs/0107/26/-254330.htm

Surprise: Tax rebate not a rebate
Checks being mailed are really an advance on 2001 refunds

By David Milstead / Scripps Howard News Service

WASHINGTON -- The tax-relief checks that will start arriving in mailboxes
next week should have a consumer-warning label: "Warning: This check is not a
'rebate' of taxes you already paid. It's an advance on the refund you'll get
when you file next April. "
If it's an advance, you ask, does that mean my refund in April will be
$300 smaller than it would have been? And if I'm unlucky enough to owe taxes,
does that mean my tax bill will be $300 higher?
The answer to both questions is yes. But you'd never guess that from the
1040 you'll fill out next year. It's been designed so that it's nearly
impossible to realize how the 2001 rebate checks affect your tax preparation
in 2002.
"I think people think what they're getting is a refund of taxes they paid
in 2000," said Gary Dudley, the tax partner-in-charge at Deloitte & Touche's
Denver office. "If they think their taxes were going to show up lower April15
(from this change), they're not."
The "immediate tax relief," as the Internal Revenue Service calls it, was
designed by Congress and the Bush administration to give taxpayers the
benefit of a 2001 tax-rate reduction as soon as possible. Rather than wait
for next April, you'll get the tax cut now.
"Congress intended the credit to take care of the rate reduction for
2001," said John McGreevy, an assistant branch chief for administration with
the IRS. "They wanted to get money into people's pockets for an economic
stimulus."
Bear with us for the math on how your check is calculated: The rate on the
first $6,000 of income for singles and $12,000 for married taxpayers filing
jointly is being cut from 15 percent to 10 percent. That's why the refund
checks range from $300 for singles ($900 in taxes reduced to $600) and $600
for marrieds ($1,800 in taxes reduced to $1,200).
But if you were to fill out the tax form next April using the new rates,
you'd get the tax-cut benefits a second time. That's why the tax tables that
will accompany next year's 1040 will charge you the old 15 percent tax rate,
not the new 10 percent rate.
The IRS could have included a line at the end of the 1040 where you took
the amount of the refund check and reduced your refund by $300 or $600 or,
even worse, added that money to the tax bill you owe. You won't have to do
that, because the amount owed you pull from the tables at the back of the
booklet will have already done that for you.
"The risk of that (line) approach is that the adjustment could flip you
from a refund to a balance due, and you really wouldn't believe you received
that money," Dudley said.
But before you direct your anger at the IRS, look to the folks who
designed -- and are taking credit for -- this advance-refund system: Congress
and President Bush.
"It was not left to our discretion," said Marilyn Brookens, an IRS
attorney in Washington. "It was a congressional and presidential decision to
do it this way, and we're implementing what we were told to do."
Brookens points to the tax-cutting language in the report from the
House-Senate conference committee that Bush signed into law this year. The
law said that in 2001, the advance refund occurs "in lieu of" the rate cut
from 15 percent to 10 percent.
That statement, Brookens said, meant "if we didn't do it this way, we
would be in trouble with them."
But there are practical reasons, too, Brookens said: "It's an effort to
have as few people as possible enter a number on the 1040. Every time there's
another computation, it increases the likelihood of errors.
"It's the way that will be quickest, most effective and result in the
fewest number of errors," she said.”

“When you mix accountants, politicians and the IRS together, I guess this is what you get!”

“we should have expected nothing less! you never get something for nothing especially from the Gov!”

“So my banjo was bought using my next year's tax rebate?

It's still worth it...tha'Gov't bastards!”

“Eliminate the entire federal tax structure and institute a flat federal sales tax. That way our money only gets taxed once when we buy something not when we earn it, when we save it, when we invest it AND when we spend it. We get hit up for cash at every turn. We allow politicians and lawyers to lie to us and cheat us by accepting a tax structure that we don't (or can't) understand. If we don't understand a problem it makes it hard to correct the problem.”

“AMEN HPM”

“Ditto HPM!!!”

“what is the flip side of that coin HPM? I agree with you, as well as anyone I have ever talked to about this. What are the cons of a flat tax?”

“Frankly it depends on who you talk to. Some argue (the pessimists)that it means a lot less money to run the government thereby cutting the amount of services that it can offer (which pleases those who favor a vastly smaller goverment) The optimists say that it would put the economy on a growth trend such as the US has never seen due to the fact that people have more of their own money to use. If that were to be true then the Federal coffers would be overflowing with funds due to the massive amount of business transactions. I can only see one downside and that is that as far as taxation is concerned every one pays and there are no exemptions. Meaning that the poor who currently don't pay income and investment taxes will now be forced to the same as everyone else taking a bigger cut out of what little they do (or don't) earn.”

“Let's try it, now!”

“The only way we'll get any kind of real tax reform is when we once again have a REPRESENTATIONAL government.

Right now, the country is run by a bunch of millionaire @ssholes who have no concept of the average American's life (remember George Bush and the bar code scanner?), whose major concern is getting re-elected and spending other people's money, and who have absolutely no retirement worries, thanks to their cushy little plan.

I think all senators' and reps' salaries should be tied to the median income of the district they each represent. Soft money and pac money would be outlawed; long overdue campaign fund reform is needed. Lobbyists would be shot on sight. Most of congress' perks would disappear. Their retirement scam would disappear and they'd pay into the black hole of Social Security just like the rest of us.

If they lived like, were paid like, and were treated more like ordinary citizens, instead of like untitled royalty, we might see a little progress on balancing the budget, simplifying the tax code, and cutting down on wasteful pork barrel spending, and less crap like this pulling the wool over America's eyes.

I believe it was Jefferson who said something to the effect that we ought have a revolution every 20 years ( and I know I'll be corrected if I'm wrong). We're long overdue.

There, I feel better. My rant for the day.”

“Congress DOES pay into Social Security and has since 1984. The Congressional retirement system is actually less generous than many private sector plans.

You fell victim to that internet urban legend making the rounds.”

“The current system is fair and simple -- at least it was at first. Then congressmen of both parties began handing out special treatment to every voting bloc they were courting. So now we have a mish-mash of exemptions, credits, deductions, ad nauseum that makes it impossible to understand. Some of that favorable tax treatment falls my way too, so I am not criticizing too harshly.

A flat tax would evolve the same way. The ink wouldn't even be dry on the new tax code before politicians would begin tinkering with it. It will soon end up as complicated and unfair as the current system. This is not supposition. Even Steve Forbes, the guru of the flat tax, concedes that will happen.

Contrary to what talk show idiots tell you, the rich in America pay the majority of taxes and the poor pay the least. This will reverse under a flat tax. The rich will pay less and the poor will pay more.

Since I am significantly above median U.S. family income I would pay less than I do now, so the idea has some appeal. But I am not asserting a flat tax is more fair.”

“Wow, steiny, you live where? Massachusetts? I think the only way that you will get something close to real representation is if you limit everyone to only ONE term. How many terms have the most powerful senators had? And I like the idea of a lobbyist open season....but that would just send all lobbyists underground. They would still be spreading the wealth for the price of a vote. I don't have an idea for solving that problem.”