Posted on 01/04/2013 8:40:47 AM PST by MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
Our supervisor just notified us that the accountant will be placing a 2% increase in payroll tax on our checks per the "Fiscal Cliff" bill. They lied to the American people and taxed everyone more. Where's the media on this? Liars, liars, liars, liars, liars. Oh, so what! The people who voted that party into office doesn't pay taxes anyway.
Your latest vanity only provides additional confirmation of what many of us have known about you since November of 1998.
My taxes increased $1,820. Thanks a lot congress!!!
Yes, you have it wrong. Except for the self-employed and those who overpaid SS taxes because of switching jobs, the tax return due in April has nothing to do with SS taxes. It is taken directly out of your paycheck and never has to be reported on a return or used to calculate the refund or amount owed.
Consumers got a temporary stimulus from lowered withholding but still owe the same in taxes.
No, taxes were actually lowered. Since I fill out forms as if I'm self employed (partner at a company not subject to withholding), I paid 4.2% for my "employee" half of the self employment tax and 6.2% for my "employer" half (along with 1.45% + 1.45% for Medicare). Before 2011 it was 6.2% + 6.2% + 1.45% + 1.45%.
Ours got cancelled........
Rich Lowry wrote about this five years ago.
Rebates for Non-Taxpayers?
By Rich Lowry
January 25, 2008 12:00 A.M.
Should non-taxpayers get a tax rebate? That had been the revealing sticking point in the Washington debate over an economic stimulus package.
Democrats insisted on spreading the rebate to people who don’t pay the federal income tax for a simple reason — there are so many of them. A literal rebate in the sense of giving back a bit of what people pay in federal income taxes was objectionable because it would exclude the 40 percent of households that pay none at all.
That fact is worth noting because it puts the lie to the notion that the federal tax code is a vampirish scheme by Republican economic elites to privilege the rich at the expense of the poor. Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John Edwards can barely say the word “taxes” without retailing some version of this tale, which is detached from reality and has been getting steadily more so.
http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/223492
OK, thanks.
Oh, trust me. I’ll be happy to inform them of their mistake.
Apologies, I mean “keeping the current recipients solvent.”
I didn’t mean to infer that anyone in the future will ever see their money.
Whose definition of "Fiscal Cliff" have you been using?
My own definition included any tax rate or spending control which was going to happen on or around January 1.
Even the national debt ceiling issue coming up is included in my definition.
I would agree that the media shares your definition and I think the reason is that they didn't want to draw attention to what is happening now to wage earner's paychecks. The wailing over this has only just begun. I look forward to Obama explaining to his base that this reduction in their pay was not part of the "Fiscal Cliff" so there was no reason for him to insist on extending the reduction of the payroll tax. Even liberals aren't stupid enough not to notice that their taxes have gone up.
Our supervisor just notified us that the accountant will be placing a 2% increase in payroll tax on our checks per the "Fiscal Cliff" bill.
To me, the "Fiscal Cliff" was the expiration of the Bush tax cuts, which would slam all income-earners. This "cliff" would be exacerbated by other events that would not necessarily be tied to those tax cuts; e.g., the imposition of new Obamacare taxes, and the expiration of the reduced Social Security rate. The elimination of this last item is what employers are talking about, and what wage-earners are seeing today, at least those receiving weekly checks.
Don't get me wrong, we've been teetering on a "fiscal cliff" for some time now, for all the reasons you mention. Some things we'll feel right away, others will take longer.
Last year they raised the minimum wage in Santa Fe to over $10 and in Albuquerque to $8.50. Here in Rio Rancho it is still $7.50 and with our recently elected conservative city councilors it isn’t likely to change, fortunately.
The employer’s matching tax for SS was never dropped, so it shouldn’t “go back up”. The only increase will be that the cutoff will go up a bit for 2013, in line with inflation.
Since you are an employer, you should have known that, since you have been paying the 6.2% employer SS tax for the past two years, not the 4.2% employee SS tax.
Bush once gave everyone back a lump sum rebate about this amount in the mail.
Obama couldn't bring himself to cut rates so he cut the payroll tax (SS) which was stupid because everyone knows they would have to go back up later.
Just about everything Obama does is DUMB.
I use a payroll service and am only passing on what was told to me. I will be the first one to dance a happy kazatski if it turns out to be an overstatement. The paperwork for the first payroll of 2013 will come through later today or Monday.
Nothing official from HR in HQ yet (1st paycheck of 2013 is 1/15), but the local HR made the rounds today telling us about it. Most of us already knew. If they do start exempting the first 25K there’s another incentive to cut back to part time work. Going Galt(ish) looks better every day.
Nobody lied. The reduction in withholding was TEMPORARY, and everybody knew (or should have known) that it would expire unless action was taken to extend it. It should have risen last year instead of running another year so people could get used to it.
We were notified on the agency website, but no specific emails or anything.
No prob. — I’m sure we’ll find some other stuff later on.
This is why leftists created withholding many years ago. most don't look.especially with electronic banking.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.