Fiscal Cliff New Years

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>Nope . . .It is from a Fed withholding line

I don't get this. The Fed doesn't withhold anything from your paycheck. Your company does. They calculate this via the W-4 you (theoretically) submitted when you started work.

Withholding does not change the amount you owe. If they withhold too much you get it back when you file your taxes.

Yes, the company withholds based on the tables submitted by the gov

Has somthing to do with health insurance withholding

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[quade 4]

/facepalm

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rushmc 23]

Quote

/facepalm

dont hurt yourself

agian

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,116]

>Yes, the company withholds based on the tables submitted by the gov

Agreed. Sounds like your company screwed up and guessed at what the new tax rates would be - and guessed wrong. If so your next paycheck should be back to normal, and you'll get the additional withholding back at the end of the year. If you want to get it back sooner you could give them a new W-4 but it's probably not worth it.

[champu 1]

Quote

Quote

>Nope . . .It is from a Fed withholding line

I don't get this. The Fed doesn't withhold anything from your paycheck. Your company does. They calculate this via the W-4 you (theoretically) submitted when you started work.

Withholding does not change the amount you owe. If they withhold too much you get it back when you file your taxes.

Yes, the company withholds based on the tables submitted by the gov

Has somthing to do with health insurance withholding

? Now I'm confused too... They shouldn't be withholding more federal income tax as a result of health insurance unless you've added someone you aren't related/married to to your policy and the company is covering a portion of it.

It still sounds like your company is simply withholding based on assumptions that didn't come to pass though. You could always call/e-mail your payroll department and ask.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>Yes, the company withholds based on the tables submitted by the gov

Agreed. Sounds like your company screwed up and guessed at what the new tax rates would be - and guessed wrong. If so your next paycheck should be back to normal, and you'll get the additional withholding back at the end of the year. If you want to get it back sooner you could give them a new W-4 but it's probably not worth it.

Not the case

They sent out a note tell us the checks would be smaller because of fed withholdings

If I remember the note correctly, they stated $200 average difference

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>Nope . . .It is from a Fed withholding line

I don't get this. The Fed doesn't withhold anything from your paycheck. Your company does. They calculate this via the W-4 you (theoretically) submitted when you started work.

Withholding does not change the amount you owe. If they withhold too much you get it back when you file your taxes.

Yes, the company withholds based on the tables submitted by the gov

Has somthing to do with health insurance withholding

? Now I'm confused too... They shouldn't be withholding more federal income tax as a result of health insurance unless you've added someone you aren't related/married to to your policy and the company is covering a portion of it.

It still sounds like your company is simply withholding based on assumptions that didn't come to pass though. You could always call/e-mail your payroll department and ask.

Fed OASDI/EE is what has gone up

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>Nope . . .It is from a Fed withholding line

I don't get this. The Fed doesn't withhold anything from your paycheck. Your company does. They calculate this via the W-4 you (theoretically) submitted when you started work.

Withholding does not change the amount you owe. If they withhold too much you get it back when you file your taxes.

I did find the email

Part of it is a 2% increase in SS tax

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[champu 1]

Quote

Fed OASDI/EE is what has gone up

Okay, see post #48. Or, more specifically...

((0.062 * 113700) - (0.042 * 110100)) / 12 = $202.10/mo

[quade 4]

That has zero to do with what went on in the last couple of days.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rushmc 23]

Quote

That has zero to what went on in the last couple of days.

RRrrrrriiiiiiiiggggghhhhtt

Has nothing to do with how much of my money the Fed thinks it has a right to

Gotcha

BTW kallend

This is NOT a bitch about paying taxes

It is about the rate of taxation

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[cvfd1399 0]

Mine went up $1200, Me and my wife don't make over 150k combined

[champu 1]

Quote

That has zero to what went on in the last couple of days.

Only because nobody chose to include it or it was blocked from being included in the final agreement. It has always been one of the things wrapped into what everyone referred to as the fiscal cliff though.

The Bush tax cuts expiring had zero to do with sequestration, which had zero to do with long-term unemployment expiring, which had zero to do with the temporary SS tax decrease, which had zero to do with medicare payment changes, which had zero to do with the AMT, which had zero to do with milk, and on and on and on.

It's all a part of the long term deficit concern, and it's all a part of the policy effects on the economy. Everyone who says, "well that's a problem, but it's a totally separate problem" simply has nothing to politically gain from that piece of the larger problem being addressed as part of the current negotiations.

/edited to add the underlined for clarification...

[quade 4]

No. It had zero to do with it because it had zero to do with it.

What you're suggesting is everything the government is involved with was part of the "fiscal cliff" negotiations, but simply decided not to include this. That's not the case at all.

What our friend Marc is complaining about was decided more than a ago and the rates were set no matter what happened this last week.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rushmc 23]

Quote

That has zero to do with what went on in the last couple of days.

Zero huh

77% may disagree with you

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-01/senate-passed-deal-means-higher-tax-on-77-of-households.html

Quote

Senate-Passed Deal Means Higher Tax on 77% of Households

Also reported is the bill cuts $1 of spending per $41 dollars of tax increases and the CBO still projects 4 trillion dollar higher deficit

Ya

We got a revenue problem alright

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,148]

Quote

Quote

That has zero to what went on in the last couple of days.

RRrrrrriiiiiiiiggggghhhhtt

Has nothing to do with how much of my money the Fed thinks it has a right to

Gotcha

BTW kallend

This is NOT a bitch about paying taxes

It is about the rate of taxation

Sure sounds like whining to me.

Don't you want Social Security to be solvent? Why do you hate old people?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,148]

Quote

Quote

That has zero to do with what went on in the last couple of days.

Zero huh

77% may disagree with you

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-01/senate-passed-deal-means-higher-tax-on-77-of-households.html

Quote

Senate-Passed Deal Means Higher Tax on 77% of Households

Also reported is the bill cuts $1 of spending per $41 dollars of tax increases and the CBO still projects 4 trillion dollar higher deficit

Ya

We got a revenue problem alright

Stop whining - the payroll tax cut was never meant to be permanent.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

That has zero to what went on in the last couple of days.

RRrrrrriiiiiiiiggggghhhhtt

Has nothing to do with how much of my money the Fed thinks it has a right to

Gotcha

BTW kallend

This is NOT a bitch about paying taxes

It is about the rate of taxation

Sure sounds like whining to me.

Don't you want Social Security to be solvent? Why do you hate old people?

Coming from a guy who would not put a tax dollar out to protect school age children, makes your comment worthless to me

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Stop whining - the payroll tax cut was never meant to be permanent.

[champu 1]

Quote

Quote

Only because nobody chose to include it or it was blocked from being included in the final agreement. It has always been one of the things wrapped into what everyone referred to as the fiscal cliff though.

The Bush tax cuts expiring had zero to do with sequestration, which had zero to do with long-term unemployment expiring, which had zero to do with the temporary SS tax decrease, which had zero to do with medicare payment changes, which had zero to do with the AMT, which had zero to do with milk, and on and on and on.

It's all a part of the long term deficit concern, and it's all a part of the policy effects on the economy. Everyone who says, "well that's a problem, but it's a totally separate problem" simply has nothing to politically gain from that piece of the larger problem being addressed as part of the current negotiations.

No. It had zero to do with it because it had zero to do with it.

What you're suggesting is everything the government is involved with was part of the "fiscal cliff" negotiations, but simply decided not to include this. That's not the case at all.

What our friend Marc is complaining about was decided more than a ago and the rates were set no matter what happened this last week.

The things I listed in the second paragraph were all things that were due to automatically change yesterday and were thus all considered a part of the fiscal cliff. They were all "decided more than a year ago" and what happened last week could have easily affected all or none of those things.

Nobody in congress or the senate chose to make a stand on extending the SS tax break. It's as simple as that.

[kallend 2,148]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

That has zero to what went on in the last couple of days.

RRrrrrriiiiiiiiggggghhhhtt

Has nothing to do with how much of my money the Fed thinks it has a right to

Gotcha

BTW kallend

This is NOT a bitch about paying taxes

It is about the rate of taxation

Sure sounds like whining to me.

Don't you want Social Security to be solvent? Why do you hate old people?

Coming from a guy who would not put a tax dollar out to protect school age children, makes your comment worthless to me

I fully support a tax to protect children, as I have written previously. Not my fault if you can't read.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

I fully support a tax to protect children, as I have written previously. Not my fault if you can't read.

[muff528 3]

Well, one thing we learned is that the prospect of returning to the Clinton tax rates is so terrifying that the entire country (and much of the world) has been gripped in fear of impending deep recession, plummeting stock markets, and other economic doomsday stuff. The Bush tax cuts don't seem so bad now, do they?

[JerryBaumchen 1,467]

Hi rush,

Quote

let it be known that kallend supports armed protection of all school children

I do not and will not speak for John.

But I think that he thinks as I do; your method of 'protecting' school children is simply nuts & unacceptable to the majority of Americans.

We do live in my way or the highway world.

JerryBaumchen

[billvon 3,116]

>Well, one thing we learned is that the prospect of returning to the Clinton tax rates
>is so terrifying that the entire country (and much of the world) has been gripped in
>fear of impending deep recession . . .

And another thing that we learned is that the stock market rebounds and the fear of recession evaporates when you increase taxes on the very rich . . .