Here's another example of why the tax code needs reforming....

Talked to a guy yesterday who paid $4300 in federal tax in 2011 & is getting a federal tax refund check for over $7000!
From what I've seen & heard this appears to be the rule rather than the exception. Does anyone believe this makes sense?

 

It's never made any sense. But, in a mixed-up, whacky Obama world it makes perfect sense. I think I heard him once say, "Your income tax refunds will necessarily skyrocket"... or something to the effect.

 

If the $4,300 paid into the sytem was the only factor in determining the $7,000 refund from the system then you'd have a stronger point, but there are other contributing factors that you've neglected to provide that, taken as a whole, may make sense.

I take it you didn't get a refund yourself?

 

He paid $4300 in federal tax & gets $7000 back. What other factors should we consider?

 

...... You are saying that the tax code is in need of reforming aren't you? It's in the title of the thread. The tax code therefore is a factor you should consider, but it's far from the only one.

Deductions from paychecks can vary greatly depending on the amount of exemptions claimed on the employer's copy of your W-2. Additional deductions and exemptions are filed on tax forms. Installing solar panels on the roof of your home is one example of other ways to earn a refund at tax time.

The point is, there are many other factors involved that affect the amount of a refund, withholdings are not the only one.

 

Deductions from one's paycheck only impacts one's take home pay, right? Your tax liability is your tax liability regardless of individual paycheck deductions.

 

(Regarding paychecks) If your tax liability is less than what your withholdings are then you receive a refund. If your tax liability is more than your withholdings then you owe money to the government and must pay, or make arrangements to pay, at filing.

Tax liability is calculated in part by income per year. Income can be affected by applicable deductions such as being the "Head of Household" (if applicable) or, as in my example of solar panels, a program that reduces the liabilty to offset the cost of something the government endorses but may be too expensive for some. If I'm not mistaken Electric Cars or Hybrids may be part of that program. Still too expensive for me lol ....but so is any new car or truck.

 

The bottom line is this guy paid $4300 & got back $7000.
Tell me who isn't paying their fair share when a successful citizen pays $385k in taxes & others are getting back $2700? A system that allows a negative tax liability needs to be fixed. Depending on who you believe, somewhere between 35-45% of US households get back more than they pay in.....not only are these people not paying their fair share they are sucking funds from system....funds we desperately need to control the overwhelming debt BO is amassing.
Everyone should have to pay something, no one should receive a "bonus" at the expense of others.

 

The title of this thread has merit, I believe most people will agree with me on that, in that the tax-code is in need in reforming. In truth, the tax-code evolves year to year and therefore it reforms itself every year.

Your example though doesn't meet my personal requirements for having merit. I believe most people would agree with me on that, but I admit I could be mistaken on that point.

In either case, I've done what I can to explain the reasons why the person in your example received a refund, and even you can't successfully argue that the refund was illegal, though your point is to say you believe it's unfair.

 

Who said it was illegal? Show me where I said that.
See this is how so many of your threads/posts/replies go off on odd tangents. I didn't say what you claim I said. In fact you are making quite a habit of this, why is that?
My only point in this post was to show the absurdity of our current tax code and you seem to have agreed with me. So what's all this other noise?

 

Settle the hell down, I'm not saying you called it illegal. It was nothing more than poor word choice on my part so stop your blustering. We're at the end of this debate, at least from my perspective, so there's no point in getting pissy about a minor incident.

I believe we are at this point:

You believe the person's refund was unfair and I disagree.

Same as it was in the begining of the thread. I've made my case and you've made yours. What now?

 

Well done...you have now managed to argue both for & against the same issue.

 

Correct. By looking at both sides of an issue from a more neutral point of view I can come to a more reasonable conclusion. My conclusion, based on the known information, is that the person in your example received a fair refund.

 

He is probably getting Earned Income Credit and Child Tax Credits. Those Tax Credits (as opposed to Deductions) are the fasted way to multi thousand dollar refunds. Both Tax Credit programs were boosted to higher amounts as part of the Bush Tax Cuts and extended by Obama, if I remember correctly.

Our tax system has been used for stimulus for a long time. Corporate, Farmer and Individual. etc stimulus programs are all included.

 

The reason this thread is so damn stupid is because without knowing all the factors that make up this supposed person's tax liability, it is impossible to either criticize or defend his tax return. If this person even exists or if he/she is just another one of David's hypothetical Right-wing narrative conglomerations we have seen so often, it is hard to really tell. I tend to give less benefit of the doubt than I would give most other people.

 

So you can call me a liar without any proof to back it up yet it's somehow against the rules for me to call you a

Enough from both of you ok​

 

I can give am example of my own of getting back more than paying in.

One year (Under the Bush Administration and after the Bush Tax Cuts had been passed), I had an Adjusted Gross Income of $26018 and had $962 in federal tax withholding for the year. After standard deductions and exemptions, my taxable income was $0.

So, I got back that $962 that was withheld and also got an Earned Income Credit of $2595 and a Child Tax Credit of $3000.

Which gave me a total refund of $6617.

 

David's head just exploded!

 

Well at least no one has to worry about being splattered with brain matter if they happen to be caught in the blast zone.
Funny how focused the RW'es are with low income earners, families with children, the elderly, and the disabled paying more taxes but if you're a large corporation paying no taxes, that is just fine with them. Talk about screwed up priorities.
Since 2009, 88% of income growth went toward corporate profits, not more jobs and higher wages but let's focus on those people at the bottom because there simply isn't enough money going to the wealthy.

 

When have I ever made such a statement? In fact I'm the one who first posted the link about BO's buddy Immelt & GE not paying any tax. I have repeatedly said everyone (business included) needs to contribute.

Since '09? Really? Hmmmm....who has been in office during this time????