Gina is not leaving us without her continued guidance. Her post provides links to search her blog archieves and FAQs, and to a new series “Tax Tip of the Week” on her website, for answers to your questions.
At least Bruce is not gone for good. He will post sporadically. A recent post joins fellow tax-bloggers in warning about the unintended consequences of BO’s “Making Work Pay Tax Credit”.
Gina’s was one of the first tax blogs I followed when I discovered the “tax blogosphere”. And I apparently was a kind of inspiration and mentor to Bruce when starting his blog.
* TAXGIRL Kelly Phillips Erb tackles the oft-asked question of whether a gift is taxable in her post “Ask The Taxgirl: Income Tax Consequences of a Gift”. Her answer starts off with, as I have posted in the past, the correct quick answer to just about any question you can ask about the taxability or deductibility of an item – it depends.
* Prof Jim Maule makes the perfectly sensible statement “Tax Law Ought to Make Sense” over at MAULED AGAIN.
Jim is discussing BO’s recently proposed changes to the income tax rules applicable to international transactions. Most of these proposals deal with corporate taxes, and TWTP is generally limited to 1040 issues, but the concept applies to all tax law. BO has not been, in my humble opinion, correct in many of his 1040 proposals, but, as Jim points out, these changes do actually make sense and, a rarity in tax law, are actually fair.
Tax law really ought to make sense. And politicians should always put what is best for the country and its citizens first. And women should always mean yes when they say yes. And claims made about products in tv ads should always be true. And life should be fair.
But as long as the second of the above statements continues to be the opposite of what is true Jim’s, and my, hope will never be realized.
* Speaking of BO and taxes, it seems that he has created a real mucking fess with his MAKING WORK PAY credit.
Just about every tax blogger, and many personal finance bloggers, have posted recently about this disaster and the many unintended consequences of the revisions to the federal income tax withholding tables as a result of this credit. I do believe I started the ball rolling with my post “The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 – What’s New for 2009 – Part II” back at the end of April.
The bottom line is that taxpayers with more than one job, who are claimed as dependents, and who use the tax tables to determine federal income tax withholding from pensions and annuities should take a good look at how their withholding has changed as a result of the revisions and probably file a new W-2 or W-4P.
* Kay Bell discusses a long overdue tax proposal in her post “Capital Loss Deduction Increase Proposed” at DON’T MESS WITH TAXES.
Kay reports that Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch “has introduced a bill would increase the annual capital loss deduction from $3,000 to $10,000 and index the deduction for inflation”.
The current $3,000 maximum capital loss deduction has been in effect 1978! Hatch points out that "had this limitation been indexed for inflation back in 1978, the $3,000 limit would instead now be about $9,700."
Kudos to Hatch. It’s about time increasing the capital loss deduction limit was seriously discussed.
* CCH reports that “Administration Proposes to Terminate Advanced Earned Income Tax Credit Program”. In 37 tax seasons I have never seen anyone who had an advanced EITC.
Now if only BO would consider eliminating the Earned Income Tax Credit itself!