Posts tagged as:

retirement

Taxpayer asks:
Is this true? Post this on taxgirl.com with an answer please.

Windfall Tax on Retirement Income

Adding a tax to your retirement is simply another way of saying to the American people, you’re so darn stupid that we’re going to keep doing this until we drain every cent from you. That’s what the Speaker of the House is saying. Read below……………

Nancy Pelosi wants a Windfall Tax on Retirement Income. In other words tax what you have made by investing toward your retirement. This woman is a nut case! You aren’t going to believe this.

Madam speaker Nancy Pelosi wants to put a Windfall Tax on all stock market profits (including Retirement fund, 401K and Mutual Funds! Alas, it is true – all to help the 12 Million Illegal Immigrants and other unemployed Minorities! (Actually closer to 20+ million).

This woman is frightening.
She quotes…’ We need to work toward the goal of equalizing income, (Carl Marx 101), in our country and at the same time limiting the amount the rich can invest.’ ( I am not rich, are you)

When asked how these new tax dollars would be spent, she replied:
‘We need to raise the standard of living of our poor, unemployed and minorities. For example, we have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in our country who need our help along with millions of unemployed minorities. Stock market windfall profits taxes could go a long way to guarantee these people the standard of living they would like to have as ‘Americans’.’ ;( Read that quote again and again and let it sink in. Lower your retirement, give it to others who have not worked as you have for it.

Send it on to your friends. I just did!! This lady is out of her mind=

Taxgirl says:

This time of year – with elections coming up – my inbox is chock full of emails claiming one thing or another about various Senators, presidential candidates, gas company conspiracies and the like.

I tend to ignore most of them because, quite frankly, most of them are crap.

Like this one.

But since I was asked about this one, I did check it out.

For the record, Nancy Pelosi has not proposed any such tax (nor has any other member of Congress). The windfall profits tax that she has endorsed involved the oil companies. There is nothing pending in Congress, nor being kicked around in the media (other than in this chain email) that references any such tax on retirement.

The quotes attributed to Pelosi aren’t true at all.

The first version of this email was initially circulated as a tax on stock market profits in 2006 and the facts were allegedly supported by two NY Times reporters, Walt Bogdanich and Gretchen Morgenson. Bogdanich and Morgenson are reporters with the Times but the piece that allegedly references Pelosi doesn’t mentioned her in that article (and the quotes never appear in any article). It is false. So, of course, the same story was reworked a second time as a tax on retirement monies, which began circulating via email in March 2008 – only again, not true.

Factcheck.org (one of several sources I checked) refers to this email as a “fraud” and a “malicious fabrication.”

You can always find out what bills your Congressional officials author and support by checking the Library of Congress database – rather than rely on chain emails.

If you’re not so inclined to check the database, I would at the least, recommend that you check snopes.com for more information about these chain emails before sending them on. Your friends will thank you for it.

digg_url = ‘http://digg.com/politics/Pelosi_Proposed_Retirement_Windfall_Tax_Email_a_Hoax’;

Like any good lawyer, I need to add a disclaimer: Unfortunately, it is impossible to give comprehensive tax advice over the internet, no matter how well researched or written. Before relying on any information given on this site, contact a tax professional to discuss your particular situation.

Have a question? Ask the taxgirl!

{ 8 comments }

townhall_t.jpg

It seems that nobody really knows what to do about Social Security. Or maybe it’s that lots of folks do really know, but nobody has the guts to do it…

At any rate, presidential candidate Barack Obama and other Democratic presidential candidates have previously indicated that something needs to happen to save Social Security. Initially, most support seemed to be for a plan to lift the cap on the amount of income that is taxed to provide monthly Social Security checks in an effort to save the program. The program is expected to operate in the red in just ten years and it is anticipated that the funds would be completely exhausted by 2041.

However, this week on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Obama said taxing more of a person’s income was the option he would push for if elected president.

Obama reportedly objects to benefit cuts or a higher retirement age. Instead, he said “I think the best way to approach this is to adjust the cap on the payroll tax so that people like myself are paying a little bit more and people who are in need are protected.” Currently, only the first $97,500 of a person’s annual income is taxed for purposes of Social Security. That cap is scheduled to rise to $102,000 next year.

Under current law, your Social Security retirement benefits will replace about 40% of your pre-retirement earnings. Because of the caps and other factors, the percentage is lower for people in the upper income brackets and higher for people with low incomes.

{ 3 comments }

One of the most important tax changes for 2006 is the increase in the contribution limit for Roth and traditional IRAs rises for those taxpayers who are aged 50 or more. The increase is more than 10% from $4,500 to $5,000. But if you’re under age 50, sorry, the contribution limits remain the same.

Even more impressive, phase-outs for IRA deductions also rise about 10%, beginning now at $75,000 if married filing jointly. There’s no change for single persons or heads of households (still $50,000) and $0 for a married person filing a separately.

Contribution limits for employees who participate in 401(k), 403(b) and other retirement plans have risen to $15,000. For SIMPLE plans, the limit remains at $10,000.

{ 0 comments }