will health care bill affect November elections?

[Hoss]

Intentional.  I'm trying to compare responses to changes in individual taxes resulting from Reagan tax cuts vs. Obama's.

n/a for me.  Wasn't working a job that gave me much money from 1980 (I was 12) to 1988 (do the math).  Your first comparison.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Your taxes are a direct reflection of deductions, credits, etc.  If you actually ended up with more going to the Fed and state, then you had fewer of those type of offsets.  Muddying the water is pretty much exactly to the Cheney/Rove/Murdoch play book, isn't it?

Your taxes did not actually go up, they went down.  It was the circumstances surrounding your tax situation that changed.  If they had not changed, you would have had more visibility of the fact they went down.  Sorry you didn't get more benefit from it.  I didn't get much either (none) due to changes in my situation, but I am very glad they didn't go up more than they would have without the tax cuts.

As for Reagan, you mention his tax cuts, but how about the affect of the three tax hikes he had a little bit later.  Did they affect you much?  (Didn't do too much for or against me.  They were for much higher income people.)

And then Bush I tax hikes??  ("Watch my lips")  A couple of them.
And the one under Billy Bob Clinton?

[Red Arrow]

n/a for me.  Wasn't working a job that gave me much money from 1980 (I was 12) to 1988 (do the math).  Your first comparison.

I am more interested in the responses now to the cuts then vs. the cut now than whether you were even alive in the Reagan years.

About what I expected, along party-lines.

[Red Arrow]

Your taxes did not actually go up, they went down. 

The line on Form 1040A indicating my 2009 tax has a larger number than the equivalent line on my 2008 tax form.  Talk about trying to muddy the water.  Did you learn math in Oklahoma schools?

Cuts to the incremental tax rates and increased standard and personal deductions during the Reagan years helped keep my taxes from rising faster than they did.  I was at the beginning of my career and got several nice raises for increased productivity and also some for inflation.  Between raises and inflation, it is difficult to quantify the effect of the cuts.  As I remember, the raises in rates were above my income bracket.  I still have most of the 1040 booklets if you are interested in particular rates and brackets for just a few years.

[Hoss]

The line on Form 1040A indicating my 2009 tax has a larger number than the equivalent line on my 2008 tax form.  Talk about trying to muddy the water.  Did you learn math in Oklahoma schools?

Cuts to the incremental tax rates and increased standard and personal deductions during the Reagan years helped keep my taxes from rising faster than they did.  I was at the beginning of my career and got several nice raises for increased productivity and also some for inflation.  Between raises and inflation, it is difficult to quantify the effect of the cuts.  As I remember, the raises in rates were above my income bracket.  I still have most of the 1040 booklets if you are interested in particular rates and brackets for just a few years.

Then just indicate if the percentage change between what you're being taxed this year vs last and the percentage change between this years adjusted income and last years.  But then again, if you do that you're not factoring in whether or not a deduction helps your taxes in the long run or not.

So how about the percentage change between this years taxes (not your deducted taxes but what the 1040 says you should have paid) versus last years, then see what the difference is between your gross this year and last.  I'm not saying it will be less or more, no do I really care  But, you can't throw out "I'm paying more taxes" if you're not willing to state whether or not you made more along the same scale of your tax increase or not.

Spinning much here?

[nathanm]

The line on Form 1040A indicating my 2009 tax has a larger number than the equivalent line on my 2008 tax form.  Talk about trying to muddy the water.  Did you learn math in Oklahoma schools?

I'm intensely curious about the change in your tax situation that caused your total tax bill to be higher this year. Were there some deductions you couldn't take this year?

Are you saying that line 21 is the same or lower than last year, yet line 37 is higher?

If you look at the tax table, it's plainly obvious that, for the same AGI, the tax owed is slightly lower this year. Now, you may have to pay them more now if you usually underpay slightly and owe at tax time, but most people's total tax bill is lower.

Obviously, if AMT is involved, all this goes out the window and only God (and TurboTax) know what's up.

[heironymouspasparagus]

He got a raise.  Or a kid left the household.  Or mortgage interest went down.  Or couldn't itemize versus standard deduction.  Or any one of dozens of reasons.

As for math, apparently you missed all those years through school.

If one were to be interested in reality, one could look at the tax tables that come with one's 1040 forms.  As an example, for 2008 a single person with an AGI of 50,000 would have a tax bill of $8850.

Same circumstance in 2009 is $8694.  That is what they mean by T-a-x C-u-t.
Spelled slowly so more easily understood, in case English was missed along with math.

[JeffM]

n/a for me.  Wasn't working a job that gave me much money from 1980 (I was 12) to 1988 (do the math).  Your first comparison.

I believe he's talking about me.... give me a little time, and I can be more forthcoming about HOW and WHY the Reagan administration raised my taxes in a time of national recession and double-digit unemployment......

[Red Arrow]

I believe he's talking about me.... give me a little time, and I can be more forthcoming about HOW and WHY the Reagan administration raised my taxes in a time of national recession and double-digit unemployment......

Thank you,  I wanted to let you into this on your own.

For the rest of you, I got a small raise but I believe the way pay periods crossed the 31 Dec/ 1 Jan date, I didn't get exactly 1 year salary each year.  Also, my investment income was about 1/2 for 2009 compared to 2008.  But ...  2009 Form 1040A, Line 37 (total tax) was still higher than 2008 Form 1040, Line 61 (total tax).  I paid more tax in spite of this great tax cut for the middle class.

By the way, I never have doubted that the $ you paid in taxes went up.  As I have been getting beat-up, the reason is why.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Don't know why your numbers went up, but it was only because the AGI with adjustments that calculates that number went up.
It's all in the tables.

[Red Arrow]

Don't know why your numbers went up, but it was only because the AGI with adjustments that calculates that number went up.
It's all in the tables.

The hype is bigger than the cut.

I am single, no dependents, salary, some interest income, and no mortgage (which would make it possible to itemize). This makes my taxes simple enough I can do them without TurboTax or H&R Block.

I have to use the standard deduction and the standard exemption, quantity = 1.  In 2008 they were $5450 & 3500 respectively.  In 2009 they were $5700 & $3650 respectively.  The difference was $400 on the total between the 2 years. That comes off your income, not your taxes. In other words, if all else was the same, your taxable income for 2009 would be $400 less than for 2008.  This is only about 1% on a $40,000 taxable income. If you are in the 25% bracket, that will save you about $100 on your taxes for the year.

Hopefully I can attach copies of the 2008 and 2009 Tax Rate Schedules

For a taxable income of $40,000 in 2008, your tax would be $4481.25 + 25% of the amount over $32,500 = $6,356.25
For a taxable income of $39,600 in 2009, your tax would be $4675.00 + 25% of the amount over $33,950 = $6,087.50
(I got the $39,600 by assuming the same AGI except using the increased standard deduction and exemption discussed above.)

The difference is $268.75 per year.  If you get paid every other week, it would be  approximately $10.34/paycheck.

I'm not about to turn the reduced rates down but it won't make me go buy a new car.  So much for the great tax cut for the middle class.

Now for the clinker.  Most of my first paycheck for 2009 included pay for 2008 and only a little of my first check in 2010 included pay from 2009.  Boiled down, this means I got more than a year's salary as taxable income in 2009.  This overwhelmed the cuts for 2009 and I payed more tax in 2009 than in 2008.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Yep, the hype is bigger.  You would have to be a millionaire to really benefit.  The got better cuts - much earlier - about 2001 and 2003.

Actually the percentage change on this one is about 4%, similar to one of the Bush I rich people cuts earlier in the decade.  Because it covered so many people, it turned out to be the biggest tax cut in the history of the world - $289 billion.  Neither of us is gonna get rich on that one.

Why would you use the schedules rather than the tables??  The instructions specifically state not to.  And that the schedules are for reference only.  (Don't make much difference, but rules are rules....)

So, you actually made more in 2009, so there was more tax - the difference you saw.  It all evens out year to year.  Either way, we are both screwed.  But you know what?  We are the lucky ones...it is our grandkids that are really gonna have to deal with this crap.  We have done a number on them that is beyond shameful!!

I won't buy a new car either.

[Red Arrow]

Yep, the hype is bigger.  You would have to be a millionaire to really benefit.  The got better cuts - much earlier - about 2001 and 2003.

Actually the percentage change on this one is about 4%, similar to one of the Bush I rich people cuts earlier in the decade.  Because it covered so many people, it turned out to be the biggest tax cut in the history of the world - $289 billion.  Neither of us is gonna get rich on that one.

Why would you use the schedules rather than the tables??  The instructions specifically state not to.  And that the schedules are for reference only.  (Don't make much difference, but rules are rules....)

So, you actually made more in 2009, so there was more tax - the difference you saw.  It all evens out year to year.  Either way, we are both screwed.  But you know what?  We are the lucky ones...it is our grandkids that are really gonna have to deal with this crap.  We have done a number on them that is beyond shameful!!

I won't buy a new car either.

I didn't use the schedules on my real tax but it was easier to use them for an example which will be close enough and I was able to post supporting documentation.

If someone believed all the hype about the great middle class tax cut, I should have paid less tax in 2009 since my raise was truly not that big and especially since my interest income was down so much.  Just like a small tax cut, I wasn't about to turn the raise down and I am grateful to still have a job. Salary up a little is better than down any any day.

No kids, no grandkids here. After about another 30 years (I hope), I won't care about the USA or anything.  My only interest in doing the right thing is to do the right thing.

[Red Arrow]

The Tax Rate Schedules also clearly show the marginal rates for different levels of taxable income.  The dollar range each rate covers was raised a bit but the rates stayed the same.  It will depend where you were within the rate whether or not you get a break from shifting the range.

[Conan71]

I believe he's talking about me.... give me a little time, and I can be more forthcoming about HOW and WHY the Reagan administration raised my taxes in a time of national recession and double-digit unemployment......

Dreaming up a real whopper, eh?