“AGAIN, AND AGAIN, AND AGAIN – THERE IS NO CHANGE IN TAX RATES FOR 2009.”

Again and again and again and again and again.

It is a tax credit. $400 for individuals, $800 for couples, that are subtracted from your tax bill.

See above. If you paid $12,400 under the Bush tax cuts, you will now pay $12,000 after the Obama tax cuts.

You are an imbecile. And happy teabagging.

Until then cling to the:

‘Obama has lowered taxes on 95% of Americans’

moonbattery.

Tell all your friends.

Including your republican golfing buddys.

They must find you a hoot.

You are as stupid as they come.

THERE IS NO CHANGE IN THE TAX RATE . THE STIMULUS BILL PROVIDES FOR DECREASED WITH HOLDINGS ONLY. THAT IS WHAT THE QUOTE FROM THE IRS YOU POSTED MEANS.

******READ THE INFO YOU YOURSELF PROVIDED OR HAVE SOMEONE WITH SOME INTELLIGENCE EXPLAIN IT TO YOU*******

ALL…ALL…IT MEANS IT THAT BASED ON WEEKLY INCOME, WITH HOLDING ARE DECREASED. AS WEEKLY INCOME PRORATES TO MORE THAN $125K, THE DECREASE IN WITH HOLDINGS GETS LESS.

AGAIN, AND AGAIN, AND AGAIN – THERE IS NO CHANGE IN TAX RATES FOR 2009. THE CHANGE IS IN THE WITH HOLDING FORMULA, NOT THE TAXABLE INCOME THAT THE TAX CODES WILL USE TO COMPUTE 2009 TAXES DUE APRIL 15TH 2010.

THERE IS NO CHANGE IN TAX RATE ON THE BOOKS, THEREFORE, THERE IS NO INCOME TAX CUT ON THE BOOKS.

OBAMA HAS YET TO SIGN ANYTHING INTO LAW THAT REDUCES TAX RATES ON ANYONE FOR 2009. IF HE HAD ANY INTENTION OF REDUCING 2009 TAXES BY $400 OR ANY OTHER FIGURE, HE WOULD HAVE GIVEN OUT $400 OR SOME OTHER FIGURE TAX REBATES AFTER APRIL 15TH 2009.

ANYONE WHO THINKS THAT OBAMA WILL SIGN ANYTHING INTO LAW THAT REDUCES TAXES ON ANY MORE THAN LOW DOUBLE DIGITS OF TAX PAYING WAGE EARNERS*****IF THAT*****WILL END UP PAYING LESS IS A FOOL.

AND I AM BEING OPTIMISTIC SAYING***IF THAT*** AS OBAMA HAS ALREADY STATED THAT HIS PROMISE TO REDUCE TAXES ON MIDDLE INCOME WAGE EARNERS IS NO LONGER A PROMISE. AND HE CAN DO THIS WITHOUT SIGNING ANYTHING TO RESCIND A TAX CUT BECAUSE HE HAS NOT SIGNED ANYTHING YET THAT PROVIDES FOR A TAX CUT. UNTIL HE DOES, THE REDUCTION IN WITH HOLDINGS IS TAXES OWED.

YOU HAVE NOTHING IN HAND OTHER THAN AN ANTICIPATED REDUCTION IN 2009 TAXES OWED EQUALING THE AMOUNT OF REDUCED WITH HOLDINGS BASED A PROMISE, FROM SOMEONE WHOSE PROMISES HAVE EXPIRATION DATES, THAT HE WILL SIGN ANYTHING INTO LAW THAT REDUCES 2009 TAX RATES ON ANYONE FOR 2009.

I think he will be forced by political expediency to sign something into law that provides for reduced rates for something in the 50k range of single income payers. But I could be wrong that he’ll even do that much as income tax revenues keep falling.

I think it’ll take about another 2 -3 months at the rate things are going before he openly reneges on the 2009 tax cut promise. I am going to enjoy the hell out of the reaction from useful idiots like yourself when all this finally dawns on them.

This whole tea party thing has run its course. Time to step it up, if you people are serious. We need a million or two on the lawn in Washington. Who else is willing to spend some vacation time? I’m damn sure am!

Sic Semper Tyrannis

You are a coward. A yellow bellied coward.

Man up and admit your mistake. I understand this would make the entire teabag party is built on a fraud but that is nothing new. The right has been taking orders from frauds for as long as I can remember.

Let’s say you earned 65,000 in 2009. Under George Bush’s tax cuts you’d pay about 12,400 in federal income tax.

Along comes President Obama who enacts a $400 tax credit to those who earn less than 250,000.

At the end of 2009 when your tax bill is due you owe 12,000. $400 less.

And somehow you honestly believe this isn’t a tax cut? Seriously? This has me just shaking my head. I cannot believe anyone could think like that.

Now man up and admit you were wrong. And no need to apologize for the remarks about my intelligence when it is you who is out in left field. I forgive you.

Just curious. What is your educational background?

I just read through your posts again and cannot believe the ignorance displayed when it is in plain sight that Obama lowered the taxes paid by 95% of Americans.

And I must have missed this utter lunacy.

“why there is no change in taxes paid in without changing the tax codes (which you have to do to cut taxes)”

Which is exactly what Obama’s stimulus package did. It changed the tax code you buffoon.

He provided a tax credit, which is a change in the tax code, and provided for lower taxes for 95% of us.

My Lord. Now man up and admit you were wrong and have no idea what you are talking about.

By the way, where did you hear the nonsense you peddle? The drug addled Limbaugh? Hannity? Savage? Fox?

“The numbers of wage earners that will end up realizing any advantage from the changes in with holding when their tax return is due in 2010 are in the low double digits. LOW double digits. Everybody else pays all, or most of it back.”

The numbers are right there in front of your face from the IRS’s website.

And no, the numbers of wage earners, those making 75K or 150K as a couple, receive a tax credit, that lowers there tax bill, of $400 or $800. The tax credit does not apply to those making over 250K so about 95% of Americans receive the credit.

And no one, no one, has to pay any of it back. Not one penny. It says it quite plainly ON THE IRS”S WEBSITE.

“why a tax credit is neither a tax rebate nor a tax cut, but taxable itself”

And you top off your stupidity with this beauty. A tax credit lowers your tax liability, you imbecile. It is not taxable itself.

Good grief. You are the dumbest, most stubborn wingnut hack I have ever run across.

It’s right there on the website of the IRS. In plain sight.

The numbers of wage earners that will end up realizing any advantage from the changes in with holding when their tax return is due in 2010 are in the low double digits. LOW double digits. Everybody else pays all, or most of it back. Obama has not lowered taxes on 95% of Americans. He has dramatically increased them on every household in the US, wage earners or not.

Having an accounting degree from a big ten university, I’m sure you’re familiar with sources on taxes, the economy – US and global – business, deficits, the difference between a tax credit and a tax cut. Sources like VOX and the Financial Times. I realize that the people who write for them only have masters, doctorates, fellowships, chairs and so on from places like Harvard, Wharton…and are certainly not up to the standards of an accounting degree from a big ten university. But even someone with an accounting degree from a big ten university might find one or two unique perspectives, perhaps a well documented graph or two. They might even stumble across a dispassionate apolitical analysis of what the numbers being bandied about lately might actually mean. Taxes, deficits, tax credits, percentages of who actually pays income taxes, who doesn’t, why there is no change in taxes paid in without changing the tax codes (which you have to do to cut taxes), why a tax credit is neither a tax rebate nor a tax cut, but taxable itself, value added taxes, end user taxes…

But then, being a graduate of a big ten university with a degree in accounting, I suppose you mastered that sort of thing as a freshman.