yeah. but I get a much better return on the investment in the long run than they do (they only get it for the year) and if I was taking the deductions all year, my financial history has shown that I would not only have no investments to show for it, I would *also* have a whopping tax bill to come up with April 15...just seems to work out that way...
YMMV ... it usually does ^_^ FWIW: I got the EIC exactly once, the year my son was born (1994) I was making $6.50 an hour at a quick-print shop and my wife (then girlfriend) was making $5 something working part-time (she made too little to file). I filed Head of Household and claimed EIC, filed on April 14, 1995. I finally got the EIC in late October after jumping through innumerable hoops to prove 1) the squalling infant heard in the background of the phonecalls with IRS reps was "alive"; 2) his SSN (applied for at the hospital the day he was born) was valid; 3) he was *my* son (I asked the rep at that point if it seemed reasonable to go through the awful process the IRS was putting me through if he wasn't...no reply) all for about $600... one month's rent... although I qualified the next year, I didn't even bother. haven't needed to since. will ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dana Tierney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 12:01 PM Subject: Re: What the Bush tax cut could have paid for > You realize you are loaning the government money interest-free though I > assume. If it works better that way for you though I say hoorah. And as > though I am one to critique... I have failed to claim a number of refunds > <g> > > Dana > > On Thu, 29 May 2003 11:46:59 -0700, William Bowen > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Married, two kids, wife stays at home with them eliminating child care > > costs > > (and therefore childcare deduction). When I was self-employed I stayed at > > home with the kids and she worked, didn't have child care deductions at > > that > > time either. > > > > Single income for the time being, though my bride is making noises about > > wanting to get a job as soon as the youngest enters 1st grade in the > > fall. > > > > I subscribe to the "take as few deductions as possible" method of filling > > out W2s, which I know means the gov't gets to earn interest on the money > > while they have it, but this way I can bank on getting a big check at the > > end of the tax cycle (or at least not ambushed by a tax bill!!!). I can > > then > > invest in our IRAs/Mutual Funds, portfolio (seems to be much easier to do > > it > > that way than to try to take a paycheck deduction...). > > > > will > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Dana Tierney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 11:27 AM > > Subject: Re: What the Bush tax cut could have paid for > > > > > >> Self employed. Owe more in Social Securuty but I like it better this > >> way. > >> Did you have children? The child care costs make the difference usually. > >> Actually it would be nice if, like corporations, individuals could > >> auction > >> off their unneeded deductions. When daycare costs were $350 a week I > >> just > >> didn't need that kind of deduction. > >> > >> Dana > >> > >> > >> On Thu, 29 May 2003 11:10:34 -0700, William Bowen > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> > true. don't know if single can file and have dependants, never had to > >> > look > >> > into it. > >> > > >> > so, are you self-employed? if so, my hat is off to you if you're able > >> to > >> > get > >> > a refund (or even come out even) the three years I did it, I always > > ended > >> > up > >> > writing a check even after paying quarterly :( > >> > > >> > will > >> > > >> > ----- Original Message ----- > >> > From: "Dana Tierney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> > To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> > Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 10:52 AM > >> > Subject: Re: What the Bush tax cut could have paid for > >> > > >> > > >> >> ::nod:: but if a head of household by definition has dependents its a > >> >> bit > >> >> unrealistic not to include those. Speaking to the case I am best > >> >> equipped > >> >> to critique. I do believe that in my case the tax saving will > >> actually > >> >> be > >> >> zero next year also, unless my income skyrockets (knock on wood). I > >> got > >> > the > >> >> $400 number from this link but on looking closer, my taxes paid are > >> >> never > >> >> that high. > >> >> > >> >> Dana > >> >> > >> >> On Thu, 29 May 2003 10:45:26 -0700, William Bowen > >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > no EIC, no child care expenses, no education credits and a whole > >> >> litany > >> >> > of > >> >> > other things that could apply. > >> >> > > >> >> > like I said, tax returns and fingerprints... > >> >> > > >> >> > ^_^ > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > will > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > ----- Original Message ----- > >> >> > From: "Dana Tierney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> >> > To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> >> > Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 10:31 AM > >> >> > Subject: Re: What the Bush tax cut could have paid for > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> >> lol. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> I think the link we are using is a little simplistic though...and > >> >> yes, > >> > I > >> >> >> realize I provided it. It was the best I could find. I do note > >> >> however > >> >> > that > >> >> >> the category closest to my own situation does not seem to take the > >> >> >> earned > >> >> >> income credit or dependent care credit into account, and thus, I > >> >> >> believe, > >> >> >> overstates the tax savings. I am correct in saying that you do not > >> >> get > >> >> >> the > >> >> >> difference if the credit makes taxes owed a negative number? > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Dana > >> >> >> > >> >> >> On Thu, 29 May 2003 10:20:37 -0700, William Bowen > >> >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > married with no kids and one income still files MFJ, even with > >> one > >> >> >> > income. I > >> >> >> > suppose one could file Single while married with one income but > >> >> there > >> >> > are > >> >> >> > a > >> >> >> > number of reasons not to, not the least of which is there is a > >> >> >> > significant > >> >> >> > deduction (more now that the tax legislation has been signed) > >> for > >> > MFJ. > >> >> > It > >> >> >> > was explained to me once long ago, but the calculations are lost > >> >> from > >> >> >> my > >> >> >> > memory at the moment, must be all the "need this to do my job > > code" > >> >> >> I've > >> >> >> > got > >> >> >> > stuffed in there now. If I had time to dwell on it, it'd prolly > >> >> come > >> >> >> to > >> >> >> > me... > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > ^_^ > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > hell, even the IRS recommends filling out the forms in multiple > >> >> ways > >> >> >> (if > >> >> >> > you > >> >> >> > qualify under more than one) to find the best way to get the > >> most > >> >> >> money > >> >> >> > back. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Also don't feel too bad about "confidently giving out > >> >> misinformation" > >> >> >> a > >> >> >> > simultaneously good and bad thing about our tax system is that > >> it > >> >> > closely > >> >> >> > represents fingerprints, no two are exactly the same. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Besides, only the person that takes the advice can be prosecuted > >> >> for > >> >> >> > mistakes, unless you prepared the form for them...oh, and also > >> >> their > >> >> >> > spouse > >> >> >> > (if MFJ), unless you use the Innocent Spouse Relief... > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > I better stop now, the permutations could go on for days. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > ^_^ > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > will > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > ----- Original Message ----- > >> >> >> > From: "Dana Tierney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> >> >> > To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> >> >> > Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 10:02 AM > >> >> >> > Subject: Re: What the Bush tax cut could have paid for > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> Really. Didn't realize that. Just know that is what I am :) My > >> >> > apologies > >> >> >> >> for confidently giving out misinformation. It is a bit bizarre > >> >> >> though. > >> >> > I > >> >> >> >> don't see how marital status makes a difference to the amount > >> of > >> >> >> money > >> >> >> >> paid?? Maybe it is intended to compensate for extra costs like > >> >> >> >> daycare... > >> >> >> >> but there is a separate deduction for that. > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> Dana > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> On Thu, 29 May 2003 09:50:25 -0700, William Bowen > >> >> >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > I think it you're required to do Married Filing Jointly oddly > >> >> >> enough. > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > Married Filing Seperately (MFS) requires two incomes, > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > You can't file Head of Household if you're married. > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > From the 1040 instructions: > >> >> >> >> > Head of household. This status is for unmarried people who > >> paid > >> >> >> over > >> >> >> > half > >> >> >> >> > the cost of keeping up a home for a qualifying person, such > >> as > > a > >> >> > child > >> >> >> >> > who > >> >> >> >> > lived with you or your parent whom you can claim as a > > dependent. > >> >> >> >> Certain > >> >> >> >> > married people who lived apart from their spouse for the last > >> 6 > >> >> > months > >> >> >> > of > >> >> >> >> > 2002 may also be able to use this status. > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > IANATA (I am not a Tax Attorney) though. > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > ----- Original Message ----- > >> >> >> >> > From: "Raymond Camden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> >> >> >> > To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> >> >> >> > Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 9:34 AM > >> >> >> >> > Subject: RE: What the Bush tax cut could have paid for > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> >> Dumb question - but as the income earner for my family (my > > wife > >> >> > takes > >> >> >> >> >> care of the home and kids), am I Joint/HOH or whatever MFS > >> is? > >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> > > >> ======================================================================== > >> >> >> >> >> === > >> >> >> >> >> Raymond Camden, ColdFusion Jedi Master for Mindseye, Inc > >> >> >> >> >> (www.mindseye.com) > >> >> >> >> >> Member of Team Macromedia > >> >> >> >> (http://www.macromedia.com/go/teammacromedia) > >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> >> >> >> >> Blog : www.camdenfamily.com/morpheus/blog > >> >> >> >> >> Yahoo IM : morpheus > >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> "My ally is the Force, and a powerful ally it is." - Yoda > >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> > -----Original Message----- > >> >> >> >> >> > From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> >> >> >> >> > Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 10:22 AM > >> >> >> >> >> > To: CF-Community > >> >> >> >> >> > Subject: Re: What the Bush tax cut could have paid for > >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 Host with the leader in ColdFusion hosting. Voted #1 ColdFusion host by CF Developers. Offering shared and dedicated hosting options. www.cfxhosting.com/default.cfm?redirect=10481 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
