Rude surprise for taxpayers.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Millions of Americans enjoying their small windfall from President Barack Obama's "Making Work Pay" tax credit are in for an unpleasant surprise next spring...

...millions of taxpayers to get hundreds of dollars more than they are entitled to under the credit, money that will have to be repaid at tax time....

...The Internal Revenue Service acknowledges problems with the withholding tables but has done little to warn average taxpayers...

...The credit pays workers 6.2 percent of their earned income, up to a maximum of $400 for individuals and $800 for married couples who file jointly. Individuals making more $95,000 and couples making more than $190,000 are ineligible.

...Rep. Dave Camp of Michigan, the top Republican on the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee, said Geithner has yet to respond to concerns raised by committee members.

"So far we've got the, 'If we don't address this maybe it will go away' approach," Camp said.

Source AP Article at Yahoo News

Thought you were going to get to keep it? Think again. Due to a screwed up tax table mandated to be used by employers many will have to pay some back next year.

I can't help but also note that Obama promised the tax break to individuals making under $125,000 and Couples (Households) earning under $250,000 but as you can see they managed to exclude many more people by fudging on the numbers and lowering them to $95,000 and $190,000 respectively.

Once again Geithner is not answering questions from Congress Persons. Why am I not surprised.

With this Administration reality never matches what they say, does it?

SSDD

Originally posted by Blaine91555
With this Administration reality never matches what they say, does it?

Given the quagmire-cluster he inherited, I continue to give the man the benefit of the doubt.

It took W 8 years to royally do the pooch, I suspect it might take awhile to get things back on track.

Or is this supposed to be another Bash Obama thread under the guise of the IRS tax error?

KK

The foolish profligacy of the past is no excuse for what is happening now.

Decisions and contracts are being made. Not only do I not like the decisions and contracts made, I don't like they way they make them.

The past is no excuse..., except maybe in the minds of political careerists, the Hollywood-Madison Avenue crowd, and partisan sheep.

reply to post by kinda kurious


Bush is off topic. For the record I don't like either Obama or Bush.

To defend bald faced lies is a bit disigenuous I guess, unless people actually like being lied to.

No Lobbyist he said over and over and then he appoints what 17 of them? Honesty has no place with this man. Not even a sign of basic morality. Is honesty too much to ask for?

Did you catch what he said about the Tea Party people yesterday? He is talking about my friends and neighbors who do nothing but work hard and earn little.

I do not believe this little tax error was a mistake as a large percentage are joint filers who will have to pay back money they were given at the worst possible time. By next year hyper-inflation will kick in. Look to history.

Give people a tiny handout and then take a lot of it back. At the very least these people are incompetent. How many errors have they made already? We deserve the best at the Top and we ended up with mid-level managers advanced to a level beyond their abilities and knowledge. They can't even vet their appointees properly. President is not a training position.

Originally posted by kinda kurious

Originally posted by Blaine91555
With this Administration reality never matches what they say, does it?

Given the quagmire-cluster he inherited, I continue to give the man the benefit of the doubt.

It took W 8 years to royally do the pooch, I suspect it might take awhile to get things back on track.

Or is this supposed to be another Bash Obama thread under the guise of the IRS tax error?

KK

But Obama was part of the problem. You can not possibly blame everything on Bush. Obama was part of those who created this huge financial fiasco. But I guess Obama can blame Bush.:

apnews.myway.com...

WASHINGTON (AP) - "That wasn't me," President Barack Obama said on his 100th day in office, disclaiming responsibility for the huge budget deficit waiting for him on Day One.

It actually was him - and the other Democrats controlling Congress the previous two years - who shaped a budget so out of balance.

And as a presidential candidate and president-elect, he backed the twilight Bush-era stimulus plan that made the deficit deeper, all before he took over and promoted spending plans that have made it much deeper still.

OBAMA: "Number one, we inherited a $1.3 trillion deficit.... That wasn't me. Number two, there is almost uniform consensus among economists that in the middle of the biggest crisis, financial crisis, since the Great Depression, we had to take extraordinary steps. So you've got a lot of Republican economists who agree that we had to do a stimulus package and we had to do something about the banks. Those are one-time charges, and they're big, and they'll make our deficits go up over the next two years." - in Missouri.

THE FACTS:

Congress controls the purse strings, not the president, and it was under Democratic control for Obama's last two years as Illinois senator. Obama supported the emergency bailout package in President George W. Bush's final months - a package Democratic leaders wanted to make bigger.

click link for more

---

OBAMA: "I think one basic principle that we know is that the more we do on the (disease) prevention side, the more we can obtain serious savings down the road. ... If we're making those investments, we will save huge amounts of money in the long term." - in Missouri.

THE FACTS: It sounds believable that preventing illness should be cheaper than treating it, and indeed that's the case with steps like preventing smoking and improving diets and exercise. But during the 2008 campaign, when Obama and other presidential candidates were touting a focus on preventive care, the New England Journal of Medicine cautioned that "sweeping statements about the cost-saving potential of prevention, however, are overreaching." It said that "although some preventive measures do save money, the vast majority reviewed in the health economics literature do not."

And a study released in December by the Congressional Budget Office found that increasing preventive care "could improve people's health but would probably generate either modest reductions in the overall costs of health care or increases in such spending within a 10-year budgetary time frame."

Obama is not doing anything to stimulate or help this economy....and as in the OP, here is another blunder by him.

[edit on 4/30/2009 by greeneyedleo]

Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by kinda kurious

 

Bush is off topic.

OK, let me see if I understand.

You start a thread about the IRS. Cool

You divert and bring up the current President. Cool

I respond and bring up how the former President's actions affect the current President. Uncool.

Oh, I get it.

[edit on 30-4-2009 by kinda kurious]

Actually, you were the first to bring up Bush:

Originally posted by kinda kurious
It took W 8 years to royally do the pooch, I suspect it might take awhile to get things back on track.

reply to post by kinda kurious


I'll go with you. Explain how Bush had anything to do with this topic?

The truth is you went after Bush, whom I also don't like on a thread about a topic he played zero part in. What is your point. That you can't discuss anything without changing the subject to Bush?

Sorry I should have added the part about the tax break promise that was broken is most certainly on Obama's head. He made the promise. He broke the promise. It is mentioned in the article is it not?

reply to post by jerico65


Ummmm? Your point Sherlock?

Read my post, I admit to justifiably bring up W in the context of OP.

KK

Lets have a truce and discuss the broken promise and the nasty little surprise trick played on those who got the tiny little tax break who were expecting a large tax break and now have to pay part of it back.

I do not believe it was an error but was in fact intentional to get the public support he needed. I think this was carefully orchestrated. It was not an error.

I was hoping to discuss the above in this thread if I was not clear.

I was also hoping to discuss how Geithner is once again ignoring the wishes of Congress and won't answer questions.

Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by kinda kurious

 

I'll go with you. Explain how Bush had anything to do with this topic?

OK, thanks. I'll try before the pile-on.

In your OP you stated:
With this Administration reality never matches what they say, does it?
( i.e. That is a nice, civil ATS way to say they are liars. No?)

I responded to the effect that it will take time to sort things out due to the misdeeds and ineptitude of prior Administration.
( i.e. That is a nice, civil ATS way to say they are idiots. No?)

We are in a discussion forum. I am exercising my right to discuss an opposing view. No?

KK

Originally posted by kinda kurious
Ummmm? Your point Sherlock?

Read my post, I admit to justifiably bring up W in the context of OP.

KK

Yeah, I noticed, Poindexter. Nice edit!

Originally posted by Blaine91555
Lets have a truce and discuss the broken promise and the nasty little surprise trick played on those who got the tiny little tax break who were expecting a large tax break and now have to pay part of it back..

Seems fair. I'll do you one better so you can have your fun. I'll kindly excuse my self, run along and go find another sandbox. Apparently, this one seems to have been mistaken for kitty litter.

My parting shot. I suspect Obama and his crew are doing little more than re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. He got handed the helm after 8 years of steering our great country toward an iceberg before the "Captain" conveniently abandoned ship.

I have laid off all my employees, and am losing my business of 10 years.
I'm as angry and fed up as anyone. A paltry couple hundred dollar tax break ain't gonna restore my life. I feel entitled to blame who I please. Thanks.

Sincerely...KK

reply to post by kinda kurious


Explain how the previous administration had anything to do with this topic? The new tax changes were 100% Obama and his Administrations doing.

I'm a person who appreciates honesty and the integrity that goes with it. I'm neither Republican or Democrat. I'm insulted when I'm lied to by people who should not be lying. Aren't you? I could easily go into a tirade about liars on both sides but I was interested in the topic of this article as I'm not buying it was accidental. People at that level don't make the number of supposed errors we are seeing. Or is it incompetence. I don't know, but I'm on a board that discusses theories am I not?

$125,000 is not $95,000 and $250,000 is not $190,000. Pure math in this case. Once again deception I think was pre-planned.

I will go as far as to say Bush's spending was insane. I'd also have to say that since this Administration has spent more in a few months than all other Presidents combined?

If I'm not mistaken the true cause of this all was dishonest Banks and Derivatives. I don't envy Obama his task, but I think his methods are wrong and he compounds that with his dishonesty about what he intended and his seeming lie about transparency.

If I say give me ten dollars and I'll mow your lawn for you. Then afterward I stop half way through mowing your lawn and ask for more to finish, I'm a criminal. If I lie on a job application or a credit application I'm a criminal. When these people lie they not only won't admit it, they threaten anyone who points out the fact they lied.

I own a business and if I lie in a contract, I would be sued and possibly face jail time. When these people run for office they make a contract with the voters. They say if you vote for me I will do a certain thing and then they do not they have broken a verbal contract that is documented on film, audio tape or written transcripts. It is technically a crime. It is also most certainly a contract.

What I don't get is why people don't care about being lied to just because they like somebody's personallity or how they speak. The best Confidence Persons are just as charismatic and unfortunately show the same level of honesty, or should I say dishonesty.

Originally posted by kinda kurious

I have laid off all my employees, and am losing my business of 10 years.
I'm as angry and fed up as anyone. A paltry couple hundred dollar tax break ain't gonna restore my life. I feel entitled to blame who I please. Thanks.

Sincerely...KK

No problem here. My business is sound and I just hired another person this week. It is because of where I live though and I know that. We are fortunate enough to have Leaders who are frugal and put us first. No State Income tax. No sales tax.

I've got over twenty years in and you have my complete sympathy and best wishes. I truly hope it improves for you. I have nothing but respect for those with the fortitude to start their own business and I sure know how damn hard that is. I hope the mess does not spill over up here, but I know that's not realistic. Hyper-Inflation is a given and that will eventually hit me in the you know whats.

We are on the same side. I hope Obama is successful, but I just can't figure out how he can borrow and monetize his way out of debt, most of which he created and also considering he signed off on the initial Bush bailout package and fully agreed with it. That would take either a Magician or he will have to raise taxes to obscene levels. Numbers don't lie, but often these people do. It's the coming inflation that scares me. I have not forgotten my 21% mortgage rate in the aftermath of Carter, so you are right about the impact of a President spilling over to the next one.

Again, good luck.

reply to post by kinda kurious


And your hate for the previous administration blinds you from laying blame on the real people responsible. Bush's ineptitude over the past 8 years has absolutely nothing to do with the present administration's decision to lower the promised ineligibility ceiling from $125,000/$250,000 to $95,000/$190,000 AND failing to get the word out.

In fact, one might say this seems eerily similar to what Geithner has been all about about with regard to taxes - keeping mum on important information, just like he was on the money he owed the government prior to being vetted for his current position on the Obama cabinet.

Your business failed and you lean toward liberalism or the Democratic party. Your past posts indicate you have a BIG problem with the prior administration. So yes, it's reasonable to conclude that your remark about Bush in the context of this post was made as a result of some hurt pride you have. Maybe you thought the present administration would save your business. I dunno. I'm sorry it didn't. But you can't go on blaming the srew-ups of the current presidential administration on the previous occupants forever. Eventually you're going to sound like a broken record, someone unable to let go of the hate. Open your eyes. The Obama administration is breaking their own campaign promises almost on a daily basis.

Obama said he would give the "middle class" or those of us making under xx amount of dollars a tax break. Well it hasn't happened AND AT THE SAME TIME he has given ultra rich Wall Street and the bank industry hundreds of billions of dollars. That's pretty much the opposite of what he said he would do on this topic. So it doesn't surprise me that when this is pointed out Obama supporters have no answer other than to change the topic to Bush or Limbaugh or Fox News. What can they say?

Despite my promise to Blaine ( who I have total respect for) I must renig on my attempt to refrain from this thread. I rarely back down from a challenge especially when flagrant ignorance is weilded.

Originally posted by sos37
reply to post by kinda kurious

 

And your hate for the previous administration blinds you from laying blame on the real people responsible. Bush's ineptitude over the past 8 years.....

And your Avatar spreads tolerance? My disdain ( hate a rather strong word) is not so great that I would bother to adopt it as a moniker.

But you can't go on blaming the srew-ups of the current presidential administration on the previous occupants forever.

Then when does the statute of limitations expire for Clinton bashing? Your ilk seem to continue to drop the Bill bomb on a regular basis. I suggest you look in the mirror. Is that a reflection or your double standard?

I find it nice that you recall my prior posts, unfortunately you don't ring any bells.

KK

[edit on 1-5-2009 by kinda kurious]

[edit on 1-5-2009 by kinda kurious]

reply to post by greeneyedleo


You know, I love how Obama keeps saying things like "Well these republican economists agree with me" like the Republicans have anymore credibility than the Democrats. What Obama doesn't know is that we don't trust EITHER of them.