U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Pets > Dogs
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-02-2009, 10:41 PM
 
Location: West Virginia
12,387 posts, read 31,343,833 times
Reputation: 8077

Advertisements

A Four-Figure Tax Break For A Four-Legged Friend? : NPR

What do you think?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-02-2009, 10:45 PM
 
Location: Middle Tennessee
186,938 posts, read 76,728,155 times
Reputation: 130176
I'll vote for it. My fur babies are my kids now. They keep me company and are a form of therapy for me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2009, 01:12 AM
 
25,953 posts, read 26,676,581 times
Reputation: 26711
That is terrific if they can do it.

Currently, if you pay a fee to a non-profit organization or rescue for your pet it is tax deductable as a donation to a charity since the dogs or cats have no "street value."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2009, 05:54 AM
 
Location: Baltimore
1,802 posts, read 7,273,102 times
Reputation: 1913
Not a good idea. I am a pet owner, but I don't see why other people who do not own pets should subsidize my decision to have them. And in effect, that's exactly what happens if they pay more tax if they do not have a pet while pet owners pay less.

Also, this would be one more loophole where taxpayers would push the envelope (like charitable deductions and business deductions) and deduct questionable expenses in order to reduce their tax bill. I think the tax code should be simplified by getting rid of a lot of these type of deductions and not further complicated by adding more.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2009, 05:58 AM
 
Location: West Virginia
12,387 posts, read 31,343,833 times
Reputation: 8077
IF you have a Service Animal their bills a deductable!

IF its a Pet its a choice as to weather you have it...so no I Dont agree with it!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2009, 06:06 AM
 
Location: in here, out there
3,064 posts, read 5,568,735 times
Reputation: 5109
How about a tax rebate for ME??? Would you want to pay that? This is almost like the cash for clunkers program, BUT YOU DON'T HAVE TO EUTHANIZE YOUR DOG. I could have used 4000$ to help repair my car.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2009, 06:38 AM
 
Location: California
10,091 posts, read 36,761,761 times
Reputation: 22096
It was talked about a few weeks ago here:
News, Bill would give tax breaks for pet owners.

It'll never happen, but at least they are talking about it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2009, 11:21 AM
 
Location: ROTTWEILER & LAB LAND (HEAVEN)
2,406 posts, read 5,348,658 times
Reputation: 6003
I'll vote, too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2009, 11:23 AM
 
6,039 posts, read 9,435,424 times
Reputation: 3945
Pets are luxuries. People shouldn't get tax breaks for them. It's okay if you get one from a shelter to be able to write off the donation, but that's it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2009, 02:20 PM
 
2,707 posts, read 5,350,324 times
Reputation: 5550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercury Cougar View Post
Pets are luxuries. People shouldn't get tax breaks for them. It's okay if you get one from a shelter to be able to write off the donation, but that's it.
I don't have an opinion on this tax break thing. I'm not looking for a tax break for Bandit. And I agree (in one sense) that pets are luxuries. HOWEVER! Study after study has shown that pets are also GOOD for us, in a way that a Lexus is not.

When I hear the word luxury, I'm immediately thinking of something exclusive, unnecessary, and needlessly expensive...an object that decorates our lives but doesn't provide any real merit. But pets have real, measurable health benefits for their owners: reducing stress, reducing blood pressure, promoting exercise, providing companionship, protecting our mental health.

So yeah, they're luxuries because not everyone can afford a pet or should allocate their resources that way. But dismissing them as "luxuries" also dismisses their very real value to us human beings, and thus to society.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Pets > Dogs
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:18 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top