Posted on 12/03/2017 8:14:22 AM PST by 11th_VA
“Yeah, public schools are expensive and mediocre, but we are all burdened with paying for them—not just those with children.”
That is a mere obvious fact. What makes it right, that “public” schools get to consider it their monopoly? Zero, zip, nada.
So what if “Jivanka and............” (whomever) may benefit from the tax deduction, so will tons of hardworking middle class parents that skimp on many things so that they can pay a tuition for their kid in private school ‘cause their public schools are so bad. You’d have us not let them have the tax deduction just ‘cause you want to play class-warfare and deny it to “Jivanka and...........”?
Sorry, the tax deduction does not look at income, and given that the expenditure of parents for K-12 school tuition spams the income range, why should it?
Good. They should be abolished.
“Asking nonparents to pay for schools twice—including particularly opulent private schools for the rich is just wrong.”
I am not asking anyone, parents or non-parents to pay for schools twice. Many parents are already paying twice. Paying taxes for schools their kids do not attend and paying for private tuition for their kid as well.
I am not asking anyone to pay twice.
I am saying what is paid in taxes and any level, be converted 100% to vouchers parents can turn in to any school of their choice. It does not make “paying twice” for anyone.
Give businesses the opportunity to receive tax credits for scholarships to for low income students to private (including religious) schools. Watch how many young people would get a lift in life from Chic-fillet, Hobby Lobby and and other morally supportive businesses.
Right—the tax deduction has no means testing. Which means it is a massive break primarily for the wealthy who send their kids to private school.
The feds have no business being involved in this or anything else involving education at all.
Taxpayers in aggregate already pay for a free school tuition for all kids. If parents want another tuition, they can pay for it themselves—unless vouchers of some type are worked out on a state or local level.
The federal government has no business at all redistributing income from poor middle-class schmoes to Jivanka’s friends who spend hundreds of thousands a year on ridiculously expensive Manhattan private schools.
You two have no interest in the Constitution for what you see as massive new entitlements for yourselves.
How many good private schools aren’t at capacity?
None in my part of the country.
Exactly. But this is a massive new entitlement for some parents and so those some parents who normally are Freepers become massive big-statists in their giddiness about the dollars that they see being redistributed from Joe Taxpayer to themselves.
Do-goodism through tax policy never works as intended—nor is it generally constitutionally based.
The Federal Government should have nothing to do with Public Education.
If the State and Local Governments want to fund Public Education it is Constitutional. The Federal Government funding it is Unconstitutional. It ain’t in there, period.
We have no Children and we have been funding Public Education through our Property Taxes for decades.
Multiple members of my family with kids are middle class, from high to low, and all send their kids to private K-12 schools and scrimp and save to do so. They are not “wealthy” and in addition to their private tuition they pay all the federal, state and local taxes that go to K-12 schools, money that does zip, zilch, nada for their kids.
Just because SOME who may benefit from a particular tax deduction is neither an argument about “fairness” nor an argument against it.
If you want to make the argument to get the federal government out of K-12 education, I’ll join you.
But as long as ANY taxes are going to K-12 education I will argue that 100% of it, per student should not be dedicated to any particular schools; it should be assigned to parents who assign it to schools of their choice. “public” or private schools.
No get off your class warfare because it has zero, zip, nada to to with Conservatism or “small government”.
I have one in private school and one that is homeschooled.
I am very curious to find out what strings are attached to the homeschooling part. I know some Canadian provinces offer tax benefits for homeschoolers but there are rules about using government-approved curriculum, no religious materials can be purchased, etc.
Very true, through my tax dollars, shared equally by others. But the new paradigm, written by the Republicans and “talking pointed” all over the place for the last few weeks, is that anybody taking a deduction that someone else can’t take is being subsidized by those taxpayers not taking that deduction. That’s the SALT deduction removal justification, and it applies everywhere. Or at least it does to those with any intellectual integrity.
Bump! My ex-wife, who is a retired school teacher, advocated something like that 25 years ago.
Class warfare does indeed have to do with the conservative agenda, when special-class subsidies such as this one create big government maniacs out of purported Freepers such as yourself.
Private schools are overwhelmingly the domain of the wealthy, and the idea of increasing federal funding for education—where the feds don’t belong at all—by giving big, fat, five- and six-figure new entitlements to, yes, predominantly the rich, is the sort of thing only socialite bimbos could be so narrow-sighted as to push for law in this country.
Again, taxpayers provide you with a free education. If you don’t like that, you can buy your own. Or, arguably, schools would be better if state and local governments supported vouchers somehow.
But Ivanka’s massive gift to her socialite moms in Manhattan is obscene.
“Private schools are overwhelmingly the domain of the wealthy”
Who attends by family income is irrelevant to any tax deduction for tuition that applies to middle class families of which there are many. It is an aid to any family, not just the wealthy. Most of my middle class family relations with kids in private schools would get the deduction and more like them would use private schools if they got the deduction.
As I said, I do not oppose the deduction as what I think is the ideal is not available - parents get the “public support” to give to any school of their choice.
Here is a link to the current 529 plan rules. A couple of interesting points:
Q. What is the main advantage of a typical 529 plan?
A. Earnings are not subject to federal tax and generally not subject to state tax when used for the qualified education expenses of the designated beneficiary, such as tuition, fees, books, as well as room and board. Contributions to a 529 plan, however, are not deductible.
Q. Can anyone set up a 529 plan?
A. Yes. You can set one up and name anyone as a beneficiary — a relative, a friend, even yourself. There are no income restrictions on on either you, as the contributor, or the beneficiary. There is also no limit to the number of plans you set up.
Q. Are there contribution limits?
A. Yes. Contributions can not exceed the amount necessary to provide for the qualified education expenses of the beneficiary. If you contribute to a 529 plan, however, be aware that there may be gift tax consequences if your contributions, plus any other gifts, to a particular beneficiary exceed $14,000 during the year. For information on a special rule that applies to contributions to 529 plans, see the instructions for Form 709, United States Gift (and Generation-Skipping Transfer) Tax Return.
Q. Who controls the funds in a 529 plan?
A. Whoever purchases the 529 plan is the custodian and controls the funds until they are withdrawn.
Q. Each 529 plan account has one designated beneficiary. What does that mean?
A. A designated beneficiary is usually the student or future student for whom the plan is intended to provide benefits. The beneficiary is generally not limited to attending schools in the state that sponsors their 529 plan. But to be sure, check with a plan before setting up an account.
Q. Can I change the beneficiary of a 529 plan I have set up?
A. Yes. There are no tax consequences if you change the designated beneficiary to another member of the family. Also, any funds distributed from a 529 plan are not taxable if rolled over to another plan for the benefit of the same beneficiary or for the benefit of a member of the beneficiary’s family. So, for example, you can roll funds from the 529 for one of your children into a sibling’s plan without penalty.
Q. What is an eligible educational institution?
A. An eligible educational institution is generally any college, university, vocational school, or other postsecondary educational institution eligible to participate in a student aid program administered by the U.S. Department of Education.
Q. I have not set up a 529 plan for my child. Can I start one now and take advantage of this new computer benefit?
Answer: You can start one anytime. But the benefit of a 529 plan comes with the tax-free withdrawal of earnings that build up in the plan based on the contributions made. Like other types of savings accounts, earnings are usually a function of time. A 529 plan which is set up while the student is already enrolled in college or in other postsecondary education may not accrue enough earnings to be of immediate benefit. However, that doesn’t mean that such a student wouldn’t benefit from a 529 plan as his or her postsecondary education continues.
So the devil is in the details, as always with our wonderful tax code. Earnings are exempt but currently the actual donations are not exempt.
In addition, new rules need to be created that expands the use of 529 plans beyond "approved DOE" schools.
The usual for such an entitlement would be for it to be means tested, which would be at least less obscene than the reverse wealth transfers that this will lead to.
But again it IMO should not be part of a federal anything. And we at least apparently can agree on this particular legislation, even if for completely differing reasons.
>
But don’t keep them open, anyone of them, on “charitable” grounds” and then tax people to support them.
Yet, admit it - THAT is never going to happen.
>
Oh, I’ll readily admit those that profess to be ‘small govt’ (C)\(R) will HAPPILY switch to their flavor of Fascism.
I’m consistent in calling ‘em out.
>
But you go ahead and be what you think is a “pure” Conservative, like Don Quixote, and I’ll keep working on what I think will transform the commitment to K-12 education from the “public school protection racket” to a system where parents chose their kids school - public, private, secular or religious.
>
Oh, I do LOVE the ‘purity’ test espoused by some around here. Either, you are for the Constitution and the Rights acknowledged or you’re not. Don’t go hiding behind, “Well, it’s not that way ‘today’, *SOOooooo*...” BS.
Enjoy trying to sanitize the pig-pen while wallowing in the s*.
>
Exactly. But this is a massive new entitlement for some parents and so those some parents who normally are Freepers become massive big-statists in their giddiness about the dollars that they see being redistributed from Joe Taxpayer to themselves.
>
Yes, there’s a plenty of (R)NC branded Fascist lovers around here; but it’s we (L) that are the red-headed-step-children whom aren’t ‘(C)’ enough. Go figure.
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.