Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [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 09-17-2020, 07:46 PM
 
67 posts, read 25,778 times
Reputation: 82

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldjensens View Post
It appears to be very clever actually. You get a loan that DT says will not have to be paid back as long as he gets re-elected. If Biden wins- well then you are going to owe the government a ton of money.



IF DT is re-elected, he will try to make it permanent and congress will stop him and he can blame congress. Even if that fails, he does not really care too much once he is re-elected to his final term.



If Congress blocks him now, he can tell people he tried to get them some relief, but Congress blocked him. Sorry, no money for you - bad congress.



I do not see anything but a win for him in this. It seems very clever.
Clever for stupid people who fall for it lol, I get what your saying though , there’s a lot of stupid people out there..he put like a poison pill effctuv

Last edited by Wo1234; 09-17-2020 at 08:06 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-18-2020, 12:54 AM
 
67 posts, read 25,778 times
Reputation: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by bassguppy View Post
My wife and I work for the VA and this most recent paycheck had the payroll deduction.

Got an extra $370 total combined. this is gonna hurt in 2021.
Why not just save the extra money for next year? I’m a fed employee too so in same boat
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2020, 10:23 AM
 
9,952 posts, read 6,679,067 times
Reputation: 19661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wo1234 View Post
Why not just save the extra money for next year? I’m a fed employee too so in same boat
Yep, same here. I just put the extra in my savings and will continue to do so for the rest of the year. My union sent out an email that you had better save, because it’s not going to be forgiven. My officemate is in a different union and she told me hers is working to bargain on this as well. I would rather opt out, since I only get like $.12 monthly in my savings account.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2020, 04:54 PM
 
31,910 posts, read 26,989,302 times
Reputation: 24816
Quote:
Originally Posted by bassguppy View Post
My wife and I work for the VA and this most recent paycheck had the payroll deduction.

Got an extra $370 total combined. this is gonna hurt in 2021.
Not if you put that money away (save) instead of letting it burn a hole in your wallet.

OTOH if you go with mentality majority of Americans who spend nearly every penny they get, then yes, be prepared to write a very large check to IRS next year by 15 April.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2020, 05:05 PM
 
14 posts, read 3,107 times
Reputation: 17
It’s a joke. That policy won’t be implemented. Y many due to the cost of development and the limited time to prepare. Additionally, it will have to be reversed with a cost. Employees are not really smart enough to know how this will have to be repaid later in 2021.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2020, 05:17 PM
 
19,039 posts, read 27,607,234 times
Reputation: 20278
Just keep in mind that, IRS is not a government agency and will NOT forgive anyone any unpaid taxes.


2. A close review of 31 U.S.C. disclosed that the Internal Revenue Service, a Private Corporation, is not shown as a division, bureau, or any part of the U.S. Treasury Department. All this can be looked up any time on Firstgov. 31 U.S.C. Chapter 3 does not list the IRS as an agency or part of the Treasury Department. 31 U.S.C. Subtitle VI section 9101 does not show the IRS as a Government Owned Corporation under “ Government Corporations “. 31 U.S.C. Subtitle I Chapter 9 section 901 does not list the IRS as an authorized agency.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2020, 08:05 PM
 
67 posts, read 25,778 times
Reputation: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by ukrkoz View Post
Just keep in mind that, IRS is not a government agency and will NOT forgive anyone any unpaid taxes.


2. A close review of 31 U.S.C. disclosed that the Internal Revenue Service, a Private Corporation, is not shown as a division, bureau, or any part of the U.S. Treasury Department. All this can be looked up any time on Firstgov. 31 U.S.C. Chapter 3 does not list the IRS as an agency or part of the Treasury Department. 31 U.S.C. Subtitle VI section 9101 does not show the IRS as a Government Owned Corporation under “ Government Corporations “. 31 U.S.C. Subtitle I Chapter 9 section 901 does not list the IRS as an authorized agency.
Where the **** you see that
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2020, 08:20 PM
 
31,910 posts, read 26,989,302 times
Reputation: 24816
Quote:
Originally Posted by ukrkoz View Post
Just keep in mind that, IRS is not a government agency and will NOT forgive anyone any unpaid taxes.


2. A close review of 31 U.S.C. disclosed that the Internal Revenue Service, a Private Corporation, is not shown as a division, bureau, or any part of the U.S. Treasury Department. All this can be looked up any time on Firstgov. 31 U.S.C. Chapter 3 does not list the IRS as an agency or part of the Treasury Department. 31 U.S.C. Subtitle VI section 9101 does not show the IRS as a Government Owned Corporation under “ Government Corporations “. 31 U.S.C. Subtitle I Chapter 9 section 901 does not list the IRS as an authorized agency.
It's funny because it is so wrong.....

quote

Contention: The Internal Revenue Service is not an agency of the United States.
Some argue that the Internal Revenue Service is not an agency of the United States but rather a private corporation, because it was not created by positive law (i.e., an act of Congress) and that, therefore, the IRS does not have the authority to enforce the Internal Revenue Code.

The Law:
There is a host of constitutional and statutory authority establishing that the Internal Revenue Service is an agency of the United States. The U.S. Supreme Court stated in Donaldson v. United States, 400 U.S. 517, 534 (1971), "[w]e bear in mind that the Internal Revenue Service is organized to carry out the broad responsibilities of the Secretary of the Treasury under § 7801(a) of the 1954 Code for the administration and enforcement of the internal revenue laws."

Pursuant to section 7801, the Secretary of Treasury has full authority to administer and enforce the internal revenue laws and has the power to create an agency to enforce such laws. Based upon this, the Internal Revenue Service was created. Thus, the Internal Revenue Service is a body established by "positive law" because it was created through a congressionally mandated power. Moreover, section 7803(a) explicitly provides that there shall be a Commissioner of Internal Revenue who shall administer and supervise the execution and application of the internal revenue laws.

/quote

https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small...Revenue%20Code.

But feel free to keep believing in that bit of drivel you dredged up; am sure you and your federal prison cellmate Bubba will be very happy together.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2020, 08:32 PM
 
2,747 posts, read 1,783,228 times
Reputation: 4438
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pick Me Today View Post
We just received an email indicating that it was a stupid idea and too costly for the agency to implement.
This might have relevance or credibility if anyone knew what agency you were referring to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2020, 06:32 PM
 
1,546 posts, read 1,194,492 times
Reputation: 6503
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuiteLiving View Post
This might have relevance or credibility if anyone knew what agency you were referring to.
Why do you need to know what agency they are referring to? Their credibility is not imputed because this information is not divulged to you.

My large state agency employer also took a similar stance. Not sufficient time or resources to implement this (fake) tax holiday. I completely concur and glad they didn't impose this silliness and inconvenience on their employees.
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 > Economics
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:02 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top