Posted on 08/21/2009 3:59:30 AM PDT by TornadoAlley3
Tax Deductions for Pet-Care Expenses Proposed Pet-care expenses would be tax deductible under a new measure introduced by U.S. Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (R-Mich.).
House Resolution 3501, commonly referred to as the Humanity and Pets Partnered Through the Years, or HAPPY Act, would amend the Internal Revenue Code to allow an individual to deduct up to $3,500 for qualified pet care expenses.
Qualified pet care expenses is defined as amounts paid in connection with providing care (including veterinary care) for a qualified pet other than any expense in connection with the acquisition of the qualified pet.
(Excerpt) Read more at veterinarypracticenews.com ...
Good lord, what the hell is wrong with people?
Hunh? McCotter??
who could oppose something called ... HAPPY? Well, I guess I could.
I am getting sick of stupid acronym bills.
One step closer to libtards being able to marry their pets.
(And I like the deduction- I like ALL deductions, but I see where this is going.)
We need affordable pet health insurance NOW!
Democrats going for the pet owner voting block.
This is nuts.
Get government out of all the things it's crept it's way into over 230 plus years and then use the tax code to collect the revenue necessary to support those constitutionally sanctioned duties. Stop using the tax code for social engineering and to buy votes with the voter's own money.
I surely hope that a “qualified pet” refers to a seeing eye dog, or some sort of assistance animal only.
McCotter is a Republican.
Shoot, I should have asked for a reciept at the vet yesterday. Oh well, my dog Yenta is going to doggy day care today, I will ask for one there. HA HA!
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Humanity and Pets Partnered Through the Years (HAPPY) Act’.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds the following:
(1) According to the 2007-2008 National Pet Owners Survey, 63 percent of United States households own a pet.
(2) The Human-Animal Bond has been shown to have positive effects upon people’s emotional and physical well-being.
SEC. 3. DEDUCTION FOR PET CARE EXPENSES.
(a) In General- Part VII of subchapter B of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to additional itemized deductions for individuals) is amended by redesignating section 224 as section 225 and by inserting after section 223 the following new section:
`SEC. 224. PET CARE EXPENSES.
`(a) Allowance of Deduction- In the case of an individual, there shall be allowed as a deduction for the taxable year an amount equal to the qualified pet care expenses of the taxpayer during the taxable year for any qualified pet of the taxpayer.
`(b) Maximum Deduction- The amount allowable as a deduction under subsection (a) to the taxpayer for any taxable year shall not exceed $3,500.
`(c) Qualified Pet Care Expenses- For purposes of this section, the term `qualified pet care expenses’ means amounts paid in connection with providing care (including veterinary care) for a qualified pet other than any expense in connection with the acquisition of the qualified pet.
`(d) Qualified Pet- For purposes of this section—
`(1) QUALIFIED PET- The term `qualified pet’ means a legally owned, domesticated, live animal.
`(2) EXCEPTIONS- Such term does not include any animal—
`(A) used for research or owned or utilized in conjunction with a trade or business, or
`(B) with respect to which the taxpayer has claimed a deduction under section 162 or 213 in any of the preceding 3 taxable years.’.
(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections for part VII of subchapter B of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by striking the last item and inserting the following new items:
`Sec. 224. Pet care expenses.
`Sec. 225. Cross reference.’.
(c) Effective Date- The amendments made by this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009.
With $3500, I could buy 20 chickens, and build a coop, then eat eggs and chicken for life. .
With $3500, I could take one heluva Med cruise, with air, for two!
How long before free veterinary care is a right?
Shouldn’t “Humanity and Pets Partnered Through the Years” be HAPPTY? These people can’t even spell!
I think the problem is the “pets are people” analogy that it seems to evoke (you get tax deductions for your kids, too). Look, I know we’ve already got tax deductions for lots of stuff, but that’s the analogy that comes to mind - my mind, anyway.
Not going to the mat on this one - just sharing my thoughts. Also I would save the “HAPPY” acronym for something more insidious - like a tax break for euthanasia or something.
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.