Posted on 11/19/2017 5:33:48 AM PST by conservativehusker
Graduate students at the University of Nebraska and other universities around the country are raising concerns over one provision of the broader tax overhaul approved on a party-line vote in the House of Representatives on Thursday.
Tuition waivers offered to graduate students and those in doctorate programs are not taxed as income under current tax laws, but the bill introduced by House Republicans would remove that exemption.
If that provision remains intact after Senate consideration, graduate students receiving a tuition waiver — about 0.05 percent of the U.S. population — would essentially be taxed on money they never receive.
Brandy Judkins, a doctoral candidate in UNL’s Teacher Education program, instructs 80 to 90 undergraduate students — most of whom are Nebraskans — aiming to become elementary school teachers, while also conducting research.
(Excerpt) Read more at journalstar.com ...
Imagine being taxed on momey you never receive
Where are you supposed to come up with the money to guve the govt?
I have an idea
Lets give every American a waiver on something - then tax it
The 0.05% can now join the small percentage of the self employed who pay the unemployment tax without the possibility of making a claim.
I paid for my under graduate and graduate studies out of my own pocket with after tax money from my salary.
These tuition wavers are essentially a gift to these students who should be paying taxes on the imputed value, like the imputed value tax on my healthcare benefits.
Company provided life insurance that is beyond certain limits as well as health insurance considered to luxurious are taxed. Students can suck it up
>>graduate students receiving a tuition waiver — about 0.05 percent of the U.S. population — would essentially be taxed on money they never receive.
My employer has a program where people can give you little awards for various good deeds and the awards give you points that you can use to buy stuff. Federal tax law forces my employer to collect income tax on the value of the item received. If I have to pay income taxes at my highest rate on a folding chair, then free tuition should definitely be taxed as income!
Social Security “contributions” are taxed.
Obviously our “representatives” did almost nothing for months and the lobbyists gave them a wish-list and our people (ha!) in Washington cobbled together this horrible legislation so they would have something to vote on at the last minute. Now they have something for the people who matter - the donor class.
It has always been the case where you owe taxes on a gift—and that is what a tuition waver is.
On the other hand, with the standard deduction increasing, I do not anticipate that many students will see their tax burden increase.
When I was in grad school, my tuition and all student fees were covered, and I received a stipend, as well. The stipend, at least, was counted as income. The rest of those benefits would have added another $10k or so to my income.
nope - because her deduction doubles
this is just a scare story by bloated universities
On the other hand, when that liberal hero girl was making noise in 2012 about her condom expense, she was attending the Georgetown University Law School, and the tuition there was about $68,000 per year. In order to have 58K available for college tuition, a taxpayer would have to have a gross wage income of about $100K before taxes (FIT, SIT, FICA, Medicare, etc.) in order to have the 68K tuition. And that would be with no other expenses against the salary. So I can see the argument to tax the tuition waiver.
Of course, I also think all government payouts now called "entitlements" should be taxed. Right now the only such payouts are Social Security benefits and unemployment benefits, which have one common trait; you have to actually work in order to get the benefit.
So let's tax EBT, ObamaPhones, Welfare, Section 8 housing subsidies, Earned Income Credits, and all the other entitlements. That way we reduce the 47% of 1040 filers who don't have to pay an income tax.
Subsidies are money.
I am not in favor of the tax code rewarding the extravagant costs of college tuition - which is what net affect of the tax code & federal subsidies have done, with inflation in those costs far and away exceeding inflation in every other sector of the economy. Academia has not had to worry about it’s ever increasing costs, it discovered it could sell the problem as one of “helping the students” and politicians from every party have rewarding it by removing pressure from academia’s customers to lower its costs.
How should we REALLY be helping “students”? We should be demanding not more subsidies and tax deductions, but demanding colleges figure out how to lower what they are charging.
I’ve worked for 15+ years doing boring corporate stuff. I don’t think I’ve ever paid a dollar of tax for imputed value of health insurance, and I’ve typically had what most would consider “good” insurance.
Going after a hundred thousand or whatever grad students for some tax just seems like such a loser politically, it makes me question if Congress really wants to pass anything at all.
Isn't that more of a semantic distinction than anything else?
Like when the employer matches payments into Social Security--it still comes out of the employee's salary, regardless of who nominally pays it.
In your example, if someone chooses an expensive school like Georgetown, and the school grants a tuition waver--the student would still be on the hook only for the tax on $68k--so the subsidized student would not, in fact, need an income of $100k.
I fully agree that the various government welfare "entitlements" should be taxed. Under the current system, they have no dog in the fight, with the result that they genuinely do not care that the current system is unsustainable and vote accordingly.
They receive no money but they receive a benefit from that money and would have to pay out of pocket otherwise.
I have one grandchild in grad school and 2 soon to follow.
There are currently many instances where people are taxed on income when they never see the money. Example: You owe $200,000 on a home mortgage and can’t pay it. The bank forcloses on the loan and sells the home at auction for $100,000. You will owe taxes on the $100,000 balance on the loan.
Can you say “Value Added Tax?” Sure I knew you could.
All people who are doing well, should pay taxes on their income. If a grad student’s only sources of income is meager earnings plus scholarship, that person wouldn’t pay taxes. But, if a grad student has lots of income, then he or she can and should pay taxes like everybody else. Why should a waitress pay taxes on tip income if a grad students making more than her, are getting a waiver?
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.