Posted on 04/11/2014 12:34:11 AM PDT by Behind Liberal Lines
The Washington Post reports that hundreds of thousands of taxpayers who are expecting refunds this month are instead getting letters informing them that because of a debt they never knew about — often a debt incurred by their parents — the government has confiscated their check.
http://m.washingtonpost.com/politics/social-security-treasury-target-hundreds-of-thousands-of-taxpayers-for-parents-old-debts/2014/04/10/74ac8eae-bf4d-11e3-bcec-b71ee10e9bc3_story.html?tid=HP_more
Maybe when President Reagan was president and when Newt Gingrich was majority leader.
Nonsense and exaggeration. The GOP is a solid improvement over any Dem.
A few, yes. As a whole? No way.
We need to think Generationally.
What does that mean? Generationally America has slid further and further to the left. Even the so-called GOP has sidled left to cozy up to the populism of, well, populism.
America isn’t a monolithic whole and it never was.
True, but every bureaucrat exists to one end: To feed themselves at the expense of the taxpayer. Until we can utterly dismantle the bureaucracy known as "Uncle Sam" it will not change. Obama, and to some extent Bush, fed and watered that monolith with so many agencies and sub agencies that more than likely one of your neighbors, if not more, rely on the federal govt. for their existence. How do we convince them to vote to end that?
Why do so few FReepers understand the political history of the country or the current state of affairs?
Why do so many FReepers still believe an "R" automatically connotes someone that is on their side in the belly of the bureaucracy?
The government can legally claw back an overpayment. The only way it used to be possible to stop them was when you died. Now they can go after your heirs. Its despicable.
They removed the statue of limitations on debt older than 10 years in the farm bill.
I would like to know WHO exactly, put it in the farm bill and a list of everyone that voted for it.
This is why they like to pass bills before anyone gets to read them.
Oddly the more I am considering this, it is hardly despicable.
With all those who currently abuse the welfare systems we have in place, do we not often desire some sort of repayment?
What is concerning though is the lack of due process. And how it appears to be a slap-shod way of contacting the debtors. (Using the old addresses?)
The other item that comes to mind for THIS generation is what if that old SS# is being used to commit identity theft to collect undeserved benefits? Can you imagine losing your entire home because some illegal alien collected benefits on your parent’s SS#?
The stories presented appear to have some sort of legit basis, but I suspect in time if the Treasury continues to pursue these matters without due process and due diligence, this could become a real boondoggle.
Every one of them, friend. They couldn’t find a populist conservative issue if it jumped up and bit them. Unless, of course, they are in cahoots with the government.
Except that in most cases a governmental entity, i.e. probate court, with the force of law, reviewed and settled those estates. If another governmental entity such as the IRS, has a late claim, it’s should be with the probate court, not the descendents of the supposed debtor. I am subject to IRS imposed deadlines. Why should the IRS not be held to court imposed deadlines?
Congresscritters pass laws they don’t even read.
Now the government can collect your long-dead grandpa’s debt from you even if you don’t know he had one.
Its insane. And Congress wonders why its held in such low esteem by the American people.
Due to abusive laws like this one! Go figure.
Yeah, but it’s hard for the same guys who voted for something to then campaign against it.
I agree it should be repealed—but I think a lot of incumbents are in a position where they can’t campaign against it.
Also, there are bigger issues that affect more people—Obamacare, the economy—that make for a better message.
Must fall under the sins of the father statute.
Especially since they tell us we don’t have to save more than 7 years of records unless you commit fraud and then you’re suppose to keep them indefinitely. I guess they consider this fraud.
Worse than that if they schmucks got the wrong person OR A STOLLEN IDENITY ETC by a cheat you've got to prove someone else wasn't your grandpa AFTER your money has been taken. I think some of the Yippie this is a swell idea crowd best think this through real good. The woman in the article was a four year old kid when this took place.
We have due process of law in this nation for a reason or rather we used too. If they can do this then they darn well can make any darn debt up they please for you to pay under these rules or worse your kids after you are dead and gone and they can't ask you about it.
I'm certain the needed records to prove ones side of this are very easy to obtain from the very agency perusing illicit payment Cough Cough.
Due process has become a joke, apparently.
Now if I were posting on that site, I would flame them by asking why “deadbeats” should be let off. LOL.
Anyway, seriously, if a person has a relatively steady income, such as a 40 hour job, there is NO REASON to ever get a refund. You simply need to up your withholding allowances to the point where you owe the gov. money at tax time, rather than vice versa. In my case, I take several “snapshots” over each year (on a spreadsheet, to make it easier), where I basically fill out my tax form, projecting what my future income will be. You want to get within 10% of tax owed or $1000 (whichever is higher) to avoid any penalties - but even the penalties aren’t that bad. Just stay below what’s owed, and that is done by tweaking withholding allowances.
It doesn’t always work, things can change (job situation, tax laws), and it would be much tougher for a 1099 estimator to get it right - but most people can do it, if they take a little time during the calendar year.
The IRS has a much easier time blocking refunds than they do using other methods, and probably a lot less push back, since the money never reaches the person. They can dip into your checking account, but there’s a much higher PR price to pay if they start doing that in what looks like an arbitrary manner.
“Isn’t there a counter-law somewhere that says children are not responsible for their deceased parents’ debts?”
I’d imagine they target the beneficiaries of the estate (they got the parents’ money, so they’ll pay).
The Supreme Court has already ruled that there is no right to Social Security, so yeah, by their twisted logic, they can.
Public benefits belong to the taxpayers at large. They are “common property.” And are not legally yours to keep. If you are no longer eligible to receive them, you must pay them back to the government.
From the article:
“....The aggressive effort to collect old debts started three years ago — the result of a single sentence tucked into the farm bill lifting the 10-year statute of limitations on old debts to Uncle Sam....”
Three years ago? John Boehner became Speaker in Jan 2011. Damned GOP, I thought until I looked at the bill.
SENATE REPORTS: No. 110-220 accompanying S. 2302 (Comm. on Agriculture,
Nutrition, and Forestry).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 154 (2008):
May 22, considered and passed House.
June 5, considered and passed Senate.
WEEKLY COMPILATION OF PRESIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS, Vol. 44 (2008):
June 18, Presidential veto message.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 154 (2008):
June 18, House and Senate overrode veto.
Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi
Now why would the WaPo want us to think this was a GOP bill?
They go after the eldest child first.
Since both my folks died before they could collect any SS benefits, will I get a check for their contribution now?
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.