Keep this quiet: Year 2002 Social Security Tax Hike (my title)

Company Payroll Dept. | 01/03/02 | Corporate

[lds23]

The Social Security Administration (SSA) has announced that the 2002 social security wage base will be $84,900, an increase of $4,500 from the 2001 wage base of $80,400. As in prior years, there is no limit to the wages subject to the Medicare tax; therefore, all covered wages are still subject to the 1.45% tax. The FICA tax rate, which is the combined social security tax rate of 6.2% and Medicare tax rate of 1.45%, remains at 7.65% for 2002.

The maximum social security tax employees and employers will each pay in 2002 is $5,263.80. This is an increase of $279 from the 2001 maximum of $4,984.80.

[justin4bush]

Actually the employer matches the employee deduction for the SocialSecurity and Medicare taxes. These amounts are paid in semi-weekly or monthly and reconciled on a quarterly basis on a form 941. Justin

[justin4bush]

Its all a part of the communist redistribution of wealth system we have here in the USA. Justin

[monkeyshine]

Jeepers Creepers! I've likely paid near $75,000 into SS in my relatively short time as a working stiff. Sure wish I had that in my IRA! Fat chance I will get any of it back, since SS is scheduled to go bankrupt the year I am eligible to receive benefits (presuming that they don't raise the retirement age again).

I sure would like a young minded candidate to run for office on a platform for reforming the SS which is going to screw Gen X and Gen Y royally!

[Digger]

Don't get carried away with facts. Just remember RUSH & the followers here that keep pounding the retoric that we are becoming more conservative. Evidence this with what RUSH said today about New York state & that GW's boys think that the pubbies can win there. I have no doubt that they can. That GREAT conservative mayor of NY will be of help. Do you know why? Because they are about as conservative as Barney Frank. See where Bush is taking this country - right under your so-called conservative noses.

[goodnesswins]

Ahem.....don't working couples get screwed too? Seems to me that when it comes to collecting SS there are deductions from the total because of the dual income aspect - even though they both paid in.....am I incorrect?

[MurryMom]

Tell me what investment firm would get away paying its customers less than a 2% return. None!

Where did you hear that SS returns only 2% to its recipients? A few years ago, anybody who paid into the system at the maximum rate and retired at age 65 would receive his or her entire "investment" back within 20 months. Retirees now receiving SS payments will tell you their returns are at least 10%, and much greater for those living past their life expectancies.

Persons who die before starting to receive SS are the only signigicant group of losers in the SS system. Republican Party sponsored bad mouthing of SS just doesn't have any basis in fact. None!

[jackbill]

And by the way...who says that the employer would be paying that money to employee if Gov didnt take it....by my way of thinking it is a regressive emoployee tax.

What would you do if Social Security disappeared? Would you pay that 6.25% to your employees or would you keep it as profit? If the caterer down the street gave it back to their employees, where would your employees go?

Bottom line, it comes out of the employee's hide.

[MurryMom]

I voted for GWB specifically to try and remedy this pile of a program.

GWB thanks you for your vote. Unfortunately, GWB gave away any chance to help the program with private investments by giving away the necessary funds along with his rich man's tax cut.

GWB's SS commission made its report last year, and it got tossed in the trash along with GWB's other campaign promises.GWB is no longer raising the issue, hoping you will remember his strong words against the evildoers when re-election time rolls around.

Aren't you proud of yourself for voting GWB?

[LN2Campy]

the people who get into a Ponzi scheme early ALWAYS get the best returns. Anyone born after 1965 or so will more than likely just barely get their own contributions back. Stop drinking the Soc. Sec. Kool Aid, dear.

[Harrison Bergeron]

"Ahem.....don't working couples get screwed too? "

No more than most, less so than others. Each partner gets to collect their due "benefits" according to what they put in. Their contributions are based on their individual, not joint, incomes. The survivor can collect the greater of the two SS pensions.

But the so-called repeal of the income tax "marriage penalty," - which taxed marrieds at a higher rate than singles - was designed to give relief to dual income marrieds only. Married folks filing jointly with a stay-at-home spouse continue to enjoy higher tax rates than singles and dual income couples who file seperately. A little bit of social engineering slight of hand designed to prop up the daycare industry and discourage stay-at-home moms.

[Razz Barry]

We've allowed S.S. to be used as welfare and no one has the backbone to stop it.

I was looking at the survivors section of my "Your Social Security Statement" and something hit me. If I died my minor child, if I had one, and my spouse would each receive $767.00 a month, if I divorced my spouse and had a minor child I'd pay $542.00 a month child support and nothing to my spouse. It seems the government thinks it cost more in S.S. to raise a child than child support.

My sister has four children, her husband died, from a drug overdose, she and the children received more in survivors benefits than I made working a 50 hr a week job. To keep from losing her goberment check, she refused to marry her boy friend, instead, she let him live with her and the kids for five years.

Another sister has a brother-in-law who is "disabled". He and his wife, who has children by another man, are separated but won't divorce because her children would lose "their" S.S. benefits.

I know several people drawing S.S. Disability only because they won't lose weight.

In all these cases the people paid little to nothing into the system, but received more than those who paid all their working lives. When I point that out to them they say "Everybody does it".

[SteamshipTime]

MurryMom, Social Security does one of two things: it either pays people more money than they contributed, a deficit financed by current payors which will only persist as long as their are more net payors than net consumers (this is also known as a Ponzi Scheme), or it pays people less money than they contributed, which is outright theft. Since its inception, the system has never had a surplus. The few times it has, the trustees promptly converted the excess receipts into Treasury Department IOU's that are losing worth faster than granddad's Confederate dollars.

You are right to criticize Bush. The only reform he should propose is to shut this con game down, satisfying all outstanding obligations with the sale of government assets, including the personal assets of high-level government employees. In his defense though, he probably figures that he has no choice, given the electorate's belief that they can live off everybody else.

I'll hold my breath for your reply. (Gasp, choke, turning purple...)

[Leto]

This isn't Puff's fault per se (only to the degree that he blocks any attempts to reform this ponzi scheme). This is a result of the system being put on autopilot by the Monihan Dole reform in the mid 80's. It relieves the pols from accountability for yearly tax increases to cover the cost of entitlement programs.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Disability payments are not funded by Social Security but are administered by SS. In other words, the Ponzi scheme isn't debited for the disability payments.

[taxtruth]

The 2% I quoted came from President Bush's statement on the average rate of return of SS.I don't think you can argue with the president can you?

[Leisler]

Not if you can the employee and get a machine or contract out to asia.

[TN Republican]

The amount of the increase was known at least a year ago, if I recall my tax prep materials correctly. They probably passed 2003's increase last year, and will be working on 2004's this year. Of course, there won't be anything done with the SS reform plans until after the election.

[MurryMom]

The 2% I quoted came from President Bush's statement on the average rate of return of SS.I don't think you can argue with the president can you?

LOL!!!

[MurryMom]

You are right to criticize Bush. The only reform he should propose is to shut this con game down, satisfying all outstanding obligations with the sale of government assets, including the personal assets of high-level government employees.

Show me a political party willing to run on this platform, and I'll show you a political party certain to be defeated in that election.

In his defense though, he probably figures that he has no choice, given the electorate's belief that they can live off everybody else.

IOW, GWB is a good liar, but he's our liar so we are obligated to love the lying SOB.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Actually, I am proud of voting for GWB. The Social Security mess belongs to the Dims, who created it and nurtured it. If Daschle would get with the program, something could've been done last year.

It's just like you Dims to screw something up and blame it on the Pubbies. Who do you think made the SSN increase 3 times the wage increase? Dims again.