Curly Surmudgeon wrote in
:
On Tue, 21 Oct 2008 01:51:34 +0000, D Murphy wrote:
Curly Surmudgeon wrote in
:
On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 23:44:35 +0000, D Murphy wrote:
They don't pay any taxes. What he does is mail them a check.
That's not a tax cut, it's welfare.
Check your facts.
This is right on his web site.
You seem confused.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/
[Provide a Tax Cut for Working Families: Obama and Biden will
restore fairness to the tax code and provide 150 million workers
the tax relief they need. Obama and Biden will create a new "Making
Work Pay" tax credit of up to $500 per person, or $1,000 per
working family.]
So if you are already paying no tax, you will get a check.
Perhaps this is the source of your misunderstanding. A "credit" is
not in any way, shape, or form "a check." Nobody is going to get "a
check."
Yes they are and here's how. His plan makes the credit fully
refundable. So if you only paid $100.00 and your "credit" is
$1,000.00 you would get a $900.00 "refund" in the form of a check. Or
one would assume electronic transfer if you so chose. If you pay
nothing you still get either a $1,000.00 or $500.00 refund depending
on your filing status.
Hard to believe, it's not a "credit" in the traditional sense of the
word if that is true.
And it will add another 10,000,000 people to the roles of those who
pay no income tax.
Potentially. Might even balance out the value of wealthy who pay no
income tax.
That's not possible with the AMT.
Sure it is, just launder income through a corporation or off shore
business.
Almost 1/3 of all U.S. Corporations paid absolutely no income tax last
year.
If you pay no tax and the government sends you a check, only a liar
would call it a tax cut. A charitable person might call it a
subsidy. A realist would call it welfare. In any case it's another
expensive entitlement that once enacted will be impossible to get
rid of.
"If" doesn't cut it. As shown above nobody is going to get "a
check."
As shown where? There will be checks and transfers. It's all in the
plan. Download the pdf and read it.
I'll do that, have a url?
Feh. I can't find it now. Here's a page on his site where they talk about
it though. They change that web site every freakin day.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/family/
Anyway I turned up this article and an op-ed from the WSJ. The difference
is this article includes comments from the Obama campaign where the op-ed
obviously wouldn't.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...x-cut-refunds-
those-who-dont-pay/print/
What Obama says is true, that even if you pay no income tax, you still
pay Social Security taxes. But if that is the issue, then cut that tax
out for earners under a certain threshold. Otherwise the EITC becomes an
entitlement that will be forever adjusted and increased during election
cycles. It might seem like quibbling but I think it's an important
difference. Let's keep all the stuff in the right column. If you earn
near the minimum you'll get back more than you paid in.
Here is the op-ed -
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1219...29751345.html?
mod=most_emailed_day
It's a little more detailed. And I learned that we are already doing
this. Obama is expanding it. It seems to me that if people need public
aid, they should get it every week rather than once per year at tax time.
--
Dan