|
|
Post by tea4me on Jan 7, 2011 11:51:59 GMT -5
I think EITC should be eliminated. The IRS website says it was approved to offset the burden of social security taxes and to provide an incentive to work (in 1975). Now social security taxes are reduced too. Some people receive a refund bigger than what they paid in. That is all.  |
|
The J
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 11:01:13 GMT -5
Posts: 4,821
|
Post by The J on Jan 7, 2011 11:54:47 GMT -5
While I'd love to see the EITC disappear, I'd rather they eliminate welfare first. At least with the EITC, you have to work a little.
|
|
so1970
Junior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 23:54:13 GMT -5
Posts: 176
|
Post by so1970 on Jan 7, 2011 11:59:37 GMT -5
While I'd love to see the EITC disappear, I'd rather they eliminate welfare first. At least with the EITC, you have to work a little. well said. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 25, 2024 4:15:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2011 12:39:31 GMT -5
While I'd love to see the EITC disappear, I'd rather they eliminate welfare first. At least with the EITC, you have to work a little. I can see your point, but the EITC annoys me because it is disguised welfare (when you get back more money than you had withheld). My experience with the EITC is that it goes to many people (not all) who for whatever reason are doing fine and would never ask for a handout because they don't need it. However when it comes in the form of a tax credit, it is just getting their money back. I have known one case where a woman worked a pretty low paying job, but her income was subsidized with child support. I know that is for the child, but the tax credit is based on the number of dependents a tax filer claims and she had a high earning ex. I also have a family member who for years lived at home without paying for rent, food, or utilities, worked a low paying easy job, and claimed the EITC. She bought cloths and partied all the time. She would have never asked the state for welfare. |
|
pushingit
Junior Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:20:52 GMT -5
Posts: 102
|
Post by pushingit on Jan 7, 2011 12:40:56 GMT -5
Do you disagree with the child tax credit too? I get $3K a year, refundable just for having spit out three kids. It could be more than I put in. (It's not, but it could be.)
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 25, 2024 4:15:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2011 12:46:56 GMT -5
I disagree with all the refundable credits. I don't think the IRS should be handing out more money than people had withheld. That should be the domain of some other department.
|
|
|
|
Post by daennera on Jan 7, 2011 12:52:39 GMT -5
I'm basically against any tax credits or deductions that encourage/discourage a particular lifestyle. Which is basically everything if you think about it:
Mortgage Interest Deduction
Child Tax Credit
Child Care Credit
Education Deductions
Energy Credits
|
|
|
|
Post by kinetickid on Jan 7, 2011 12:55:20 GMT -5
I disagree with all the refundable credits. I don't think the IRS should be handing out more money than people had withheld. That should be the domain of some other department. I agree. Relative to many of you, I'm a bleeding-heart liberal. However, even I have a cut-off point to my tax-dollar-funded generosity. Personally, I'm of the mind that the low-earning households who get welfare (in its many forms), food stamps/SNAP, Medicaid, etc., should pay something into the system from which they take. No fully-refundable taxes, no tax credits for them. |
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Jan 7, 2011 13:28:48 GMT -5
Personally, I'm of the mind that the low-earning households who get welfare (in its many forms), food stamps/SNAP, Medicaid, etc., should pay something into the system from which they take. If they are already on welfare, then they are never really paying anything into the system. All you would end up doing is forcing them to pay some miniscule taxes & then compensating the difference via some other welfare program. I think EITC is one of the better programs out there. The loss for increased income is small enough that it doesn't discourage people from trying to increase their income. A lot of other welfare programs have big enough penalties as your income increases, that one would figure what is the point in working harder. |
|
The J
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 11:01:13 GMT -5
Posts: 4,821
|
Post by The J on Jan 7, 2011 13:30:55 GMT -5
The EITC may be disguised welfare, but at least it's only welfare available to a person with a job. That's better than welfare that's available for people who don't work.
|
|
Taxman10
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 15:12:43 GMT -5
Posts: 3,455
|
Post by Taxman10 on Jan 7, 2011 13:31:16 GMT -5
Do you disagree with the child tax credit too? I get $3K a year, refundable just for having spit out three kids. It could be more than I put in. (It's not, but it could be.) i guess now we know what you're pushing  |
|
pushingit
Junior Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:20:52 GMT -5
Posts: 102
|
Post by pushingit on Jan 7, 2011 14:33:02 GMT -5
I'm basically against any tax credits or deductions that encourage/discourage a particular lifestyle. Which is basically everything if you think about it: Mortgage Interest Deduction Child Tax Credit Child Care Credit Education Deductions Energy Credits Me too. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 25, 2024 4:15:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2011 16:05:43 GMT -5
I don't like the EITC because its once again a hidden process... people THINK they are paying taxes... and aren't actively unaware of the fact that they receive more from their government than they ever pay in. I think everything should be above board and everyone should know who and what they are paying... pooks... if someone was living at home and got an EITC, it was illegal. I know the year my aide came in and said H&R block was 'screwing her over' because they weren't going to let her take an EITC... i looked through the book and it specifically said that if you were living with other people who were providing shelter, food, etc (they gave the exact example of a mother living with her parents and kids) you were NOT eligable for the EITC... Of coarse my aide kept going on and on about how she was being cheated out of 'her money'... see my original thoughts on the subject...  |
|
|
|
Post by justwhoever on Jan 7, 2011 16:15:52 GMT -5
Sigh. I know I am fixing to have stones and rotten food thrown at me but....
I am going to be thankful for the EITC this year.
I was very thankful the years we didn't get any as well.
But yeah I know...should have had a EF with a million or so dollars. But we didn't. We got caught with our pants down. We know.
We, me and my husband, are both working. My job is part-time and it's not gonna pay more or give more hours. Husband's job pays crap now but there is room for promotions. He is in the running for one now. Between him and 1 other guy.
I pray everyday for the day we will not have to have anymore help. Until that day comes I am thankful for the help I can get. Sorry you hate us for it.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 25, 2024 4:15:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2011 16:20:16 GMT -5
And i am not saying that support should automatically be withdrawn for people at levels who currently receive one. I object to its nature, both automatic and covert...
|
|
resolution
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:09:56 GMT -5
Posts: 7,273 
Mini-Profile Name Color: 305b2b
|
Post by resolution on Jan 7, 2011 16:24:13 GMT -5
I don't have a problem with the EITC. I think it is going to the right people, the ones who are out there working. I would like to see the tax code revamped though and get rid of all deductions. Just exempt the first 30-40k of income and do a flat tax without deductions on the rest.
|
|
|
|
Post by mtshastawriter on Jan 7, 2011 23:38:37 GMT -5
One of the holes in the EITC is the situation where there is someone on SSDI and the other partner works for low pay. SSDI is not taxable in that case and is not considered part of the AGI for which the EITC is figured with. The additional SSDI makes our income significantly higher than our AGI shows.
|
|
