There is a problem with the Obama middle class tax cuts...

…and people need to be made aware, particularly if they are married and file jointly, or if they are single and hold more than one job (including part time).

The intention was good. The idea was to give every working American a tax credit of $400 and every working married couple a tax credit of $800. There is also more for children, but so it goes. They didn’t want to mail out a check, because they figured people would just stuff it into a savings account or pay off credit card debt. Instead, they decided to dole it out in small bits ($10 to $20 a week or so), with the idea that people would spend that extra few bucks buying gas, or stuff from the convenience store, or a few more groceries — that sort of thing. They wanted people to spend more money, so that the economy would recover. (It is necessary for money to move around. If money doesn’t move from one person to another, the economy stagnates. That’s how money is made, or generated: by moving it around.)

Just a brief word for those who might not know the difference between a tax credit (like the middle class tax cut) and a tax deduction. You can skip this paragraph otherwise. A tax credit is a reduction in the tax. In other words, on your tax forms next year, once your tax paid (or owed) is calculated, then $400 or $800 or whatever applies will be subtracted from the tax you owe (or paid). A tax deduction, on the other hand, is a deduction from your income, not from your tax. It will typically reduce the amount of your tax owed, but typically not nearly as much as a tax credit will.

Now, here’s the problem.

If you are a married couple filing jointly and both of you are working, then both of you are receiving the increase in your take-home pay. In other words, both of you are getting $800. If you are a single person working two jobs, then both companies are increasing your take-home pay by the amount of the tax credit.

That’s all fine and good except that at the time you file, by next April 15, you will have to come up with the money to pay back what you were overpaid. A married couple gets paid a total of $1,600 in tax cuts if both work, and a single person holding two jobs gets paid a total of $800 in tax cuts from her two employers. You were entitled to only half that.

This happens because the credit is per person. Let’s say you work at ABC Inc and your wife works at XYZ Inc. Whether the payroll is done in-house or out-sourced, the payroll company for ABC (or ABC’s in-house payroll department) has no idea whether the other company is reducing your deduction. And even if it did (but it doesn’t) it still would be required by law to reduce the deduction because the tax code demands it.

I haven’t really looked at how it comes out when kids are involved, but I suspect the damage is even worse. Especially if both parties are claiming 1 or more of the kids on their W4 forms. But that’s neither here nor there. The fact is that if you and your spouse both work, or if you work two jobs, you will receive double the tax credit to which you are entitled.

Therefore, it would behoove the frugal person who doesn’t want to pay a balloon payment of $400 to $800 or more at filing time, or who doesn’t want that much deducted from the refund they’re used to seeing, to put back the money or change their W4.

The latter is what my wife and I have decided to do. We are changing our W4s to withhold half the amount of the tax credit from each of our checks (on the line that specifies “additional withholdings”) so that we basically aren’t smacked with a bill for our taxes owed plus $800 at filing time.

I’m not sure what course the debate will take. Maybe I have misunderstood the tax law, except that it was brought to my attention by our tax accountant, who advised us to make the changes to our W4s as quickly as we can. So, I’d be surprised if the facts are open for debate.

However, I must say that I’m surprised that so few people are aware of this. (No one I have spoken to is the least bit aware.) And I’m surprised that the president, whom I admire, has never mentioned this problem when, frankly, boasting about his middle class tax cut.

And so I suppose the debate is this: Is the administration less transparent than it claims to be? Is the president or the Treasury Secretary deliberately leaving people to find out about this when they file? Shouldn’t they inform people that they will need to make certain adjustments to avoid the double whammy of couples who work and singles who work two jobs?

I’m not sure why the president has not addressed this issue, because a lot of people — I’m speculating here — will not be able to afford hundreds of dollars at filing time if the amount just hits them out of the blue, without having been forewarned. And none of this even addresses the possible penalties for underpayment of taxes. I don’t know what the threshold is, but at some point, if you withhold too much, you are dinged for an additional $25 or $50 or so.

Your opinions? Speculations? Scathing rebuttals?

Look who’s back!

I don’t see why this an indictment of Obama. It’s not the responsibility of the President to cover every nuance a new policy in his public remarks.

Yes, it would be nice if the IRS would do some sort of information campaign to let people working two jobs know that they might need to adjust their withholding. But then, if you’re working two jobs you’re probably already futzing with your withholding because the default rates assume that you only have one source of income.

No, I don’t think the administration is being deceptive or purposely opaque about the issue in order to … look better. (Is that what you’re suggesting?) Self-interest alone should suffice to put that fear to rest – I would think that the jolt of being $400 down come tax time will garner a larger surge of umbrage than the positive boost from the illusion of a larger cut. Also, since it’s further from the honeymoon period, the backlash is likely to be harsher. This is from a cynical political calculus perspective.

Well, I don’t think they’re deliberately doing this, although the IRS and Treasury department probably should be more proactive in fixing it.

Here’s an article that pretty much says the same thing you did, btw, so the information is getting out there, and hopefully people who may be affected will become aware of it:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/INSIDE-WASHINGTON-Rude-apf-15091434.html/print

I don’t see what the problem is. Some people are getting a small interest free loan from the government. It’s really just a very minor screw up by the government. Those things happen.

The problem is for those people who are doing their taxes next April and find out they owe either $400 or $800 more than they expected. Especially if their withholdings are normally close to their total tax payment, then they’re going to have to scramble with coming up with $400/800 all of a sudden, which can be a lot of money to somebody who has to come up with it quickly.

I think the problem, LonghornDave, is that there are people who might not have the necessary money on hand when they file. I just spoke once again to my accountant, and she says the threshold is $1,000 before penalties are applied, so penalties won’t be a problem for childless couples and singles working two or more jobs.

But for a lot of people, I would speculate, the hit will not be insignificant. Some people will have to scurry up the money or borrow it from friends or family because even if they file an extension, the tax has to be paid no later then the 15th.

And… this same scenario continues next year. If they don’t become aware of it, they will be behind an additional three-and-a-half months on the next tax cut whammy because the plan is in effect for two years.

It is good to see from Captain Amazing that word is getting out, however. Still, I don’t think this will leave a good taste in people’s mouths. Sure, they can fix it if they know about it. But an awful lot of people don’t know a W4 from a W2. I suppose we could say “screw them”, but I suspect that if enough people are backslapped by this problem, the president’s approval numbers may suffer.

On preview, Captain Amazing has explained it much better than I.

From my perspective, I’d rather be the one getting this interest free loan than the one giving it. The fact that the government is inadvertantly giving an interest free loan, of a relatively small amount, to a small subset of the population does not seem to warrant significant criticism.

I’m not sure why you say that the default rates assume that you only have one source of income. As far as the IRS is concerned, the money you have earned is fungible. They don’t care that you got X dollars from one place and Y dollars from another place. They just care that you got a total of Z dollars.

A small subset of the population? That contradicts the president’s claim that his tax cut is aimed at 95% of working Americans. A significant number of these may not be able to pay back the “loan”. At least not without scrambling.

But what percentage of that 95% are working two jobs? 5% maybe? The vast majority of workers will never even notice there’s a problem.

Not that we should just leave that 5% to twist in the wind. The IRS should warn people that they might not be withholding enough. But it’s not a huge crisis.

I’m talking about the people that would be affected by this withholding issue, not everyone that is receiving a tax cut.

An Interest Free Loan???WTF???It’s not their money to loan, it already belongs to the taxpayer. The IRS is the one receiving an interest free loan from all of us.

Well, a somewhat larger percentage of that 95% are married and living in two income households. And while you might agree with Longhorndave that you’d “rather be the one getting this interest free loan than the one giving it.” (and I probably do too), it’s still going to be tough for people come tax day when they owe $800 and don’t have it. It’s a problem. It’s a problem they didn’t mean to cause, and it’s a problem they’re trying to fix, and it’s a problem they probably will fix, but it’s a problem nevertheless.

What are you talking about? The only interest free loans that the government receives are when people decide to withhold too much during the course of the year only to get it repaid in the form of a tax refund. Any other funds that the government borrows it pays interest on.

I can assure you that if you get $400 now and then on 4/15/10 you pay back $400, that was an interest free loan.

I’ve heard of this elsewhere and it’s definitely something that people should be made aware of, and definitely something that should be fixed or will cause problems. I do not think that this problem was deliberately orchestrated by the administration, for any reason.

That said, the IRS is getting this money and so should be able to detect whether they’re getting money from two different income sources for any given person or married couple. Wouldn’t it be a relatively trivial matter for them to search their database for any such people, check whether they’ve suddenly been getting twice as much more money as they should have, and if so mail out a form letter to the employers to cut the withholding down appropriately?

I admit it would have to be done delicately to not affect people who have manually adjusted their withholding like myself, but it still seems possible, at least off the top of my head.

If it were that trivial, they’d have done it long before now. This is just a complication of the long existing “marriage penalty” - they still don’t have good withholding tables or formula for two career couples. Two career couples usually do additional withholding now, but this will likely sneak up on people who formerly didn’t.

As for “it could be an extra $1,000” - the IRS takes credit cards.

Precisely: For two career couples the withholding tables are so messed up anyway, this is just another added complication. I fill out the W-4 forms and it still never comes out close to what I actually end up owing. For me, at least, this issue will just be lost in the shuffle.

Ed

I hadn’t heard that they’re working on a fix. Could you tell me what you’ve heard or, if it’s more convenient, link me to something? I’m not sure how it can be fixed centrally. There would have to be legislation, it seems, to force payroll companies to examine W4s for matches (singles with two jobs) and/or filing status (couples filing singly or jointly). Maybe an executive order would do, I don’t know. But it seems to me that any such solution could be extremely costly and prone to error.

I really haven’t looked up the percentages, but I’d wager that a fair, even substantial, percentage are married and filing jointly.

I absolutely agree with that. I believe it was an unintended consequence.

The problem is simply the cost. The “they” who would search the database are already doing other tasks. New theys would have to be hired — and trained — to do the searches. There would have to be contingencies for near matches. Someone would have to look at “John Smith” of Charlotte, and “Johnathon Smith” of Charlotte to be certain whether they were the same. And in fact, it can be trickier than that. Speaking of Charlotte, when I lived there, there was another guy with my identical name, and he and I often got one another’s phone calls. And then checking out all these things will take so much time because it will be channeled through a network of people whose daily routines are suddenly distupted with new work. These are the people who already check such things, and as a general rule, they may take years to finalize findings on whether this W2 matches with that 1041. That’s why they sometimes audit you for taxes from three years ago. And finally, there would have to be legislation or executive order to force the employers to “cut the withholding down appropriately”. For some small businesses who do in-house accounting, it would be problematic if their software was not flexible enough to accodomate the new law. In larger companies, the problems compound, when one computer system (operations-personnel) won’t communicate with another (accounting-payroll). And it’s hardest of all for companies who do only payroll for other companies that outsource. In that case multiple computer systems among multiple companies must communicate. It’ll cost a lot of money to hire a CIO.