Comments on: Tax Proposals in Obama’s 2010 Budget Outline

By: indexfundfan

indexfundfan — Mon, 04 Oct 2010 21:17:50 +0000

To sandy, looks like you and I are in very similar situations.

The “solution” is to work less or have only one income. The democrats have no clue that this is the message that they are sending out to working couples like us. I am sure more than a few couples have already taken this route. The tax policies are great disincentives to work hard and be successful.

By: sandy

sandy — Mon, 04 Oct 2010 21:09:06 +0000

My husband and I both work as engineers. We make about around 260K (135, 125K). We both leave home at 6 in the morning and he gets back only at 9 while I get back at 6:30PM. Children are in daycare for long periods.

My weekend gets spent on cooking for the week, laundry etc. I feel I am tired all the time. Same with him.

How is it fair that we are taxed at the same rate as someone single making 260K with his spouse at home taking care of things.

I am not against progressive taxing. But, do not tax me just because I am married. Tax me at the same rate what I will pay when I am single.

By: Aj

Aj — Fri, 25 Jun 2010 06:11:14 +0000

I am a higher wage earner in my household. We went from a combined 27,000 dollar a year income six years ago to a 260,000 dollar a year income. That’s a big jump. And we still have more money now then we would if we weren’t being taxed as much. My husband only contributes about 19,000 of our combined income. He lives in a house that has more than enough money coming in to pay a higher tax rate. Just my opinion of course.

By: TFB

TFB — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 02:19:40 +0000

Karashani – If there is a big difference in pay between the two of you, you should marry this year rather than next year. That way more of your income will be taxed at her low rates.

By: Karashani

Karashani — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 15:55:36 +0000

My fiancee and I are in a situation where we are trying to decide whether to get married at the end of this year vs January 2010. Right now I earn about 50 K and my partner earns about 40 K. This September I am accepting a job where my gross pay is 380 K. My honey’s pay will not change. My partner will continue to work. Does it make sense tax wise to marry this year or next year? Please advise! ( By the way, although we are excited to be making this money, we have serious student debt and other obligations to take care of, not to mention a nonexistent retirement fund, so a few thousand dollars makes a difference ) .

Confused.

By: TFB

TFB — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 22:37:11 +0000

Joe – Obviously this is not law yet, just a proposal, and we don’t have all the details. But if it works similarly to the lower capital gains tax rate (currently 0%) for people in the 15% or lower tax bracket, it will work like this:

If your taxable income without qualified dividend or capital gains is under $250k, any qualified dividend or capital gains between that number and $250k will be taxed at 15% and any extra qualified dividend or capital gains will be taxed at 20%. If your taxable income without qualified dividend or capital gains is already over $250k, every dollar of your qualified dividend or capital gains will be taxed at 20%.

By: Joe Lauricella

Joe Lauricella — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 19:48:11 +0000

Hello: Under the Obama Tax Proposal ,will all income below the $250 K for married couples be taxed at the lower rates or once you pass the $250K threshold will all your dividends and capital gains all be taxed at the higher rates because you passed the $250K mark. How do the marginal tax rates work here.

By: Martin

Martin — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 00:27:10 +0000

You are wrong that a “toolpusher” is a knowledge worker. The toolpusher is basically the foreman on a drill rig. At the moment, Chesapeake Energy is drilling a lot of gas wells and their toolpushers are earning a lot of overtime. If the price of natural gas moderates, toolpushers will be earning a whole lot less (or even be laid off).

You talk about the “average pay for the most common salaried job.” Chesapeake Energy has 7600 employees. NetApp has 8000 employees. SC Johnson has a lot more, but I’ll bet a lot are hourly, so the average pay of all employees is much less. These are not significant numbers of American workers. Most purchasing of cars, homes, etc. is not made by these workers because there are not enough of them.

Beyond that, I’m dubious that these tax increases are going to alter the behavior of what are (as Matt points out) high income individuals. These individuals get much bigger benefits, furthermore, from various tax deductions such as 401k or other retirement plans (an average wage earner can hardly max out their 401k, but someone at the 200k level can).

By: LIsa

LIsa — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 20:14:37 +0000

Reinstate the personal exemption phaseout and limitation on itemized deductions for those taxpayers earning over $250,000 (married) and $200,000 (single).

I find it pretty assuming on anyone’s part that considers a single person making $200,000 “rich”. Maybe that single person is divorced with children, paying child support and maybe that single person has elderly disabled parents that live with them and are responsible for their food, shelter and care, maybe that single person is supporting two households due to a partial custody agreement. And to not be able to claim deductions for that, is fucking UNFAIR. Progressive taxation is not fair.

By: D

Tue, 02 Jun 2009 16:26:06 +0000

If the married couple are both working than give them the double but when only one person in the household works why should they get another tax deduction. As is, the government is giving all these tax deductions to the married couple and only one spouse working when in reality they should be getting the same deduction as the single tax payer otherwise it’s showing that since I’m a single taxpayer and having to do the double job of working and doing the work at home makes me less of a person in the eyes of the government.