Tax return is nearly $3000 LESS because I worked part-time last year!

[indimom]

I'm getting the impression that some posters think those who are defending EIC recipients are doing it because they get that credit and are not paying fed. tax.

 

[livie1205]

I'm sorry..what is a LEO? I believe that poster was saying they should be paid 45K not they were paid that.



This is the point I am trying to make as well. If you stay home and don't work you ahve $0 if you work and make $6K but the gov't "takes" $3K you still have $3K more than you did before. As you make more money, yes the gov't takes more money but you still have more money! I guess it's the glass 1/2 full or 1/2 empty thing. I choose to live my life with the glass 1/2 full!

yes I agreed..maybe I just put it wrong...I was not saying SHE was wrong just that its a sad state when they are paid what they are..LEO law enforcment officer.

 

[snowywhite89]

Colleen27 federal minimum wage is $7.25. Two 40 hour jobs are a combined income of $30,160. That would result in about $2k per month take home. That is doable but not extravagant.

 

[Colleen27]

Colleen27 federal minimum wage is $7.25. Two 40 hour jobs are a combined income of $30,160. That would result in about $2k per month take home. That is doable but not extravagant.

Is it really now? That's great! I guess I missed the last round of changes. I haven't really paid much attention since my state established a higher-than-federal rate.

I agree that is doable; we could live on that and still take vacations.

 

[Colleen27]

we havent been talking about getting a raise but about actually paying taxes which lots of eic dont do...

It isn't as cut and dried as that, though. We sometimes get a small EIC, depending on how business was for the year, but we still pay taxes each and every year. For those making 20K/year, yes, the credit is large enough to offset all tax liability and then some, but for average-income folks nearer to the cutoff it is just a couple-few hundred dollars of their liability offset.

 

[HHSTigerFan]

So are you saying there shouldn't be a minimum wage? That employers should pay whatever they want?

I'm sorry, but it seems you've been very big on complaining about how the poor is a "drain" on society but haven't given any practical solutions other than to say "the government shouldn't give handouts".

Would have NO problem if minimum wage was scrapped, if a person feels they aren't making enough they can find another job..

As for the second part..Not much of a solution needed, how about they get a job that allows them to take care of themselves? Stop killing the business community with taxes and let the open markets do what they do best.

 

[ccgirl]

yes I agreed..maybe I just put it wrong...I was not saying SHE was wrong just that its a sad state when they are paid what they are..LEO law enforcment officer.

HA!!! Thank you for letting me know what it means. I have two immediate family members that are in law enforcement but I have never heard of that. I would agree their base pay is low compared to their risk. However, their OT is awesome! Their benefits are outstanding. Maybe it's the type of law enforcement but my family members would never have to leave their children if called in. Many of them have spouses that work when they are off. Their schedule is known months in advance. Yes, they can be forced in if the are next on the list but it wouldn't prevent a spouse from taking another job. Plus, they can pick their shift based on seniority. I find the starting salaries vary greatly with the cost of living as well.

 

[HHSTigerFan]

I'd like to know what that point is though. What's the highest tax bracket? Even if it's 50%, if I get a $1,000 raise, although $500 is going to taxes, I'm still getting $500 extra dollars. So there's still incentive.

Yes, that would be awesome, bust your butt so you can SPLIT your increase income with those that have chosen to not be productive..

 

[HHSTigerFan]

Is it really now? That's great! I guess I missed the last round of changes. I haven't really paid much attention since my state established a higher-than-federal rate.

I agree that is doable; we could live on that and still take vacations.

But its really not great, studies have shown that increasing the minimum wage only increases the cost of living for everyone and the person making min. wage still has the same buying power and everyone else has less..

 

[morgan98]

The one thing thing that certain posts on this thread seem to ignore is that some of these "rich" households are not all people who received huge bonuses in the banking industry or are in business for themselves. It is really not difficult to get to these levels many consider "rich" if you have two people in licensed professions with years of experience. In this case, you are talking about taxpayers who are W-2 employees like many other income earners.

It is somewhat insulting to continue to say that those who qualify for the EIC are hard workers in noble professions, while these so called "rich" should have no problem handing over 30% or more of every additional $$$ they earn to taxes.

 

[ccgirl]

Yes, that would be awesome, bust your butt so you can SPLIT your increase income with those that have chosen to not be productive..

The one thing thing that certain posts on this thread seem to ignore is that some of these "rich" households are not all people who received huge bonuses in the banking industry or are in business for themselves. It is really not difficult to get to these levels many consider "rich" if you have two people in licensed professions with years of experience. In this case, you are talking about taxpayers who are W-2 employees like many other income earners.

It is somewhat insulting to continue to say that those who qualify for the EIC are hard workers in noble professions, while these so called "rich" should have no problem handing over 30% or more of every additional $$$ they earn to taxes.

I think you are both right. But, to a degree I also consider it my responsiblity to care for those that "need" it. Perhaps it's my having been laid off in the past that has made me realize life can change so quickly. It could be that person that earned EIC just had her DH, the primary earner, die. It could be the family where the DH and DW worked for the same company and the company closed. It could be the family where someone was involved in a serious accident or had a serious medical illness. My whole point in this is that it is the people that choose not to work because they can make more money sitting at home mooching off the rest of the people that I have issues with. When I was laid off, there were so many of my friends who decided to stay home on unemployment (MA has a VERY generous unemployment) for two years with their children because they made more money sitting at home on unemployment than they would if they got a job and paid daycare for 2 children. That ticks me off. The people that need help due to no fault of their own are who really should benefit from this kind of help.

 

[morgan98]

I think you are both right. But, to a degree I also consider it my responsiblity to care for those that "need" it. Perhaps it's my having been laid off in the past that has made me realize life can change so quickly. It could be that person that earned EIC just had her DH, the primary earner, die. It could be the family where the DH and DW worked for the same company and the company closed. It could be the family where someone was involved in a serious accident or had a serious medical illness. My whole point in this is that it is the people that choose not to work because they can make more money sitting at home mooching off the rest of the people that I have issues with. When I was laid off, there were so many of my friends who decided to stay home on unemployment (MA has a VERY generous unemployment) for two years with their children because they made more money sitting at home on unemployment than they would if they got a job and paid daycare for 2 children. That ticks me off. The people that need help due to no fault of their own are who really should benefit from this kind of help.

I totally agree about helping people who are temporarily down on their luck and need some assistance. We need to find way that encourage working and make it worthwhile to go to work, rather than to stay home and collect a check because you actually make more staying home.

However, we really need to separate things that are choices from things that are temporary setbacks. I think that in our current society it has become politically incorrect to tell someone that the choices the have made may have some not-so-great consequences. It seems to me that in some cases, people need to realize they have made choices and now need to live within the parameters of these choices. While I really don't think I want the government making life decisions for people (like monitoring every $$$ people spend, or telling people they should not have children), I also do not thing it is wrong to stress to people that they really sometimes need to focus on long term plans, etc.

 

[ccgirl]

I totally agree about helping people who are temporarily down on their luck and need some assistance. We need to find way that encourage working and make it worthwhile to go to work, rather than to stay home and collect a check because you actually make more staying home.

However, we really need to separate things that are choices from things that are temporary setbacks. I think that in our current society it has become politically incorrect to tell someone that the choices the have made may have some not-so-great consequences. It seems to me that in some cases, people need to realize they have made choices and now need to live within the parameters of these choices. While I really don't think I want the government making life decisions for people (like monitoring every $$$ people spend, or telling people they should not have children), I also do not thing it is wrong to stress to people that they really sometimes need to focus on long term plans, etc.

I agree with you to a point, again. However, I think that if the government is paying for things they absolutely have the right to say how that money is spent. If you don't want to follow the rules; don't accept the government's money. I agree for a lot of people it seems bad choices is how they ended up in the predicament they are in.

 

[HHSTigerFan]

I think you are both right. But, to a degree I also consider it my responsiblity to care for those that "need" it. Perhaps it's my having been laid off in the past that has made me realize life can change so quickly. It could be that person that earned EIC just had her DH, the primary earner, die. It could be the family where the DH and DW worked for the same company and the company closed. It could be the family where someone was involved in a serious accident or had a serious medical illness. My whole point in this is that it is the people that choose not to work because they can make more money sitting at home mooching off the rest of the people that I have issues with. When I was laid off, there were so many of my friends who decided to stay home on unemployment (MA has a VERY generous unemployment) for two years with their children because they made more money sitting at home on unemployment than they would if they got a job and paid daycare for 2 children. That ticks me off. The people that need help due to no fault of their own are who really should benefit from this kind of help.

We need help, would you mind sending WDW some money in our name for a December trip we have planned???

 

[Muushka]

I think something that is misunderstood is the concept that people who are against entitlements have no concern for their fellow man. Nothing could be further from the truth. I prefer to give personally to people who are in need. Most of the time it is anonymous. I prefer to choose my recipients and administer it myself (or allow the charity of my choice to administer it). The government has a lousy track record of getting dollars to the right place efficiently.

Someone mentioned earlier that if entitlement programs were stopped, the charity system would clog up. But if we were taxed less, we could donate more. Wouldn't you?

 

[KennyandKim]

Ok I have read every posts from page 1-17 and I believe I have read enough and had to post.

In 2007 I was a single mom of 3 children and made the decision to return to school to earn a better living for my children. I spent 2 years in school to become a nurse. I am currently an RN and make $20 an hour. I am sick of seeing people say those who qualify for EIC are any less a part of society as those who don't. I don't get EIC for my son as he is 17 but I still claim him on my taxes as he lives at home and I still support him. I made over 35,000 last year from earned income but also had 8000 in child support. I pay taxes on everything I buy just like someone who has a 6 figure income. Don't tell me that because I qualify for EIC I am not a productive member of society or that I am not bettering myself. I took steps to better myself and help me provide a better living for my children. Even with 35,000 a year I still struggle but I make it and no I don't get food stamps or any other aid throughout the year. I even pay an insurance premium for my children so they aren't on MEDICAID either.

My sister on the other hand has 6 children and she hardly works at all and she gets food stamps, WIC, HUD and anything else she can. Does this tick me off? YES IT DOES. She knew at child 3 she couldn't afford anymore but she kept having them. Her husband is now working but that hasn't always been the case. It's cheaper for them that one works and the other stays home with their children.

I believe you should direct your anger where it belongs. The government. People are going to take advantage of anything available to them regardless of how much money you make.

 

[ohlas]

I think something that is misunderstood is the concept that people who are against entitlements have no concern for their fellow man. Nothing could be further from the truth. I prefer to give personally to people who are in need. Most of the time it is anonymous. I prefer to choose my recipients and administer it myself (or allow the charity of my choice to administer it). The government has a lousy track record of getting dollars to the right place efficiently.

Someone mentioned earlier that if entitlement programs were stopped, the charity system would clog up. But if we were taxed less, we could donate more. Wouldn't you?

pre ww2 most charity was run by the churches. Im not going to let my nebor or my family go hungry. Its ok to be poor been there didnt like it so i worked my butt off to changed it.

kennynkim your right be mad at the government. Flat tax is the only way to end it.

 

[Muushka]

snip....

I believe you should direct your anger where it belongs. The government. People are going to take advantage of anything available to them regardless of how much money you make.

You are right. But when you constantly see people taking advantage of the system, they should also take some of the blame. And as far as the government, they certainly are a major player in this entitlement mess that the US has on its hands. I am hoping that things change in Washington and the people who make decisions will take all US citizens into account and not just the ones who rely on them for their monthly support.

 

[Kitten0819]

Yes EIC is a form of welfare, but as far as I know there is NO WAY to not take it, if your family is eligible. If you fail to take the credit the government will do if for you. So it is not fair to jump on the OP for recieveing it.

I am "in the business" and this is simply not true. If you dont claim it, and you are eligible for it, the IRS will not give it to you. There are qualifications such as if the children are related to you and if they resided with you for more than half the year, also if the child is over 18 they must be a full time student or disabled. Since there are qualifications the IRS cant simply hand it out just based on income alone.

 

[StuckInKS]

but I'm not too proud to take any credit that helps to offset the ridiculous tax bill we pay for the privilege of being self-employed.

This, right here. A self-employed person making $48,000 a year who has three kids will get $71 in "welfare" (according to some posters here) from the EIC, but their SS tax bill will be around $7,300. There are NO deductions for the SS tax. The only way to lower it is through refundable tax credits. You can have 25 kids and qualify for every tax "reduction" credit known to man, but you are still going to pay the full SS tax bill without any refundable tax credits.

Some of you are calling EIC 'welfare' simply because it is a refundable tax credit. Let me ask you a few questions:

How many of you have kids and make less than $75,000 single/$110,000 married? Do you claim the Additional Child Tax credit? That is also a refundable tax credit, so you are taking welfare.

How many of you are working and make less than $75,000 single/$150,000 married? Do you receive the Making Work Pay credit in you paychecks? You may get some each week and not even know it, since it is automatic and not something that you have to ask for. But, it is also a refundable tax credit, so you are taking welfare.


If we are going to call the EIC welfare, we must do so for a refundable credits, not just the ones geared towards lower-income families.