US Sen. and US Reps Want $1,000 tax credit for Vol FF+EMS

[firemn23 8]

Does anyone have more information how we can get behind this and support it?

[Guest]

Over the weekend I will draft a message to be sent to all 435 members of US House of Reps with their e-mail addresses already on the "TO" field of the e-mail. I'll do the same for the 100 US Senators. That way all anyone interested has to do is copy the message, sign their name and address and press "SEND".

It'll take some work, but it's definitely worth it!!!! :writers_block: :writers_block: :writers_block:

[CFD320 35]

PLEASE DO NOT COMMENT ON TAX LAW IF YOU HAVE ABSOLUTLY NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!!!!!!

$1000 DEDUCTION FOR MOST PEOPLE WILL TRANSLATE INTO ABOUT $7.73.

THE ONE EXCEPTION WOULD BE, IF YOU ARE ON THE CUSP OF A TAX BRACKET AND THE $1000 GOT YOU INTO THE LOWER BRACKET THIS COULD BE WORTH A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF MONEY.

I HAVE A BS. IN FINANCE I KNOW OF WHAT I SPEAK. PM ME IF YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC QUESTION.

Please think before you post, I'm not sure how many vollys there are statewide, I will guess at about 10,000. No one honestly thinks New York State is in a position to give away ten million dollars in tax revenue, do they????? Please use your noggins, just like at an incident, no tunnel vision.

[Guest]

WOW, CFD320, it's hard for me to decide where to begin my reply.....

OK, let's do it by parts:

1. I am assuming you are referring to my posts regarding the treatment by Uncle Sam of a refundable tax credit.

2. This Bill was introduced in the U.S. Senate and simultaneously in the U.S. House of Representatives. It seeks to modify the Federal Internal Revenue Code NOT the State of New York Code. Therefore, there is no "giveaway" of NYS $s. If and when enacted into law, the Bill would apply to all 50 states and it woud be the Federal Government which would collect less revenue.

3. Once again, this is not a "deduction", it is a REFUNDABLE TAX CREDIT. Even if at the end of the year you owed NO Federal tax, Uncle Sam would then mail you the $1,000.

4. I strongly suggest you further your education by clicking on the following link:

http://www.access.gpo.gov/uscode/title26/s..._subpartc_.html

What you will see is Subpart C of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to refundable credits). I've made it easier for you by showing you the example of SEC. 34: "Certain uses of gasoline and special fuels"; this is how it would all work.

5. I will not get into an educational credential fight, so as not to embarrass you. I will point out to you that when you use e-mail and write your text in all CAPS, it means you are shouting or yelling. It's allright, you can lower your voice now.

6. You may want to consider editing your motto, especially the part that reads "he who is humble....., he who brags, etc, etc.

I chose to reply using the forum since your comment was not a pm.

[Guest CFDFASTleader]

I love firefighting and agree with Remember585 on most points.

I would be (and have been for most of my adult life) a volunteer firefighter without any compensation other than knowing that I've helped my community.

On the tax issue:

$1k tax break would be great-I wouldn't care if I got it for community service or good looks. The problem is the bleeding-heart liberals (like Chucky) give us a tax break which creates a program that costs a small fortune. Who pays for that in the end?

If he gives us a grand, then raises our taxes two grand to fund it we lost $1k. The money has to come from somewhere.

On your college books:

Take a loan for your college books-why should I pay for yours too?

[CFD320 35]

Mr. Hoss,

I wasn’t directing my comments at you......I do stand corrected. I failed to do adequate due diligence on this subject. This bill as proposed is a Tax credit. You are 100% correct, and I apologize to the readers. The last post by FASTLEADER summed up my next point on having to pay out more to fund the program than we will get back.

This type of program is a fantastic example of supply side economics (Reaganomics), which was a republican implemented economic system under which the economy boomed. Only problem is; supply side economics ended up creating a fairly severe recession. Prior to its implementation the US was a Creditor nation, by the end of Ronald Reagan’s two terms, we were the largest debtor nation on the planet. Plus, it created a gigantic domestic budget deficit, and guess who paid for that? In turn the cost of a dollar became outrageous. Now 15 years later our currency has been devalued to a point, which the dollar is no longer all mighty. So the democrats are reintroducing supply side idealism and disguising it as a "tax credit". They count on, and say they "know" the monies will be reinvested into the US economy. The previous sentence is almost a dead on definition of supply side economic theory. And, by the way, the economic fabric of this country was unraveling when Clinton left office. The best thing to ever happen to the Democratic Party was "hanging chads". That gave them the opportunity to blame the latest recession on the republicans.

Actually, the fact that this is being proposed as a credit and not a deduction is even worse. Especially for those of us in tax brackets above the bottom three, in the long run this will cost us more than we get back.

As for you embarrassing me with educational credentials, go right ahead. Intelligence is not derived from educational achievement, so the term "pissing up a rope" comes to mind. Further, I still fail see any braggadocios comments in my previous post.

I will hand it to Chuck Schumer, this is a great way to appeal to a large block of voters. Bottom line is he could still give a crap less about firefighters we are nothing more than a voting block.

[firemn23 8]

Hoss you are 100% correct. I am behind this but the true problem is the government needs thier money one way or another. Look at what happened in NJ several years ago.

[firebuff860 54]

CFD 320,

If you are against the tax cut/credit/deduction, or what ever you would like to call it do not apply for it. Since you are in the higher end of the tax bracket, you will save money by doing so. While you may not be affected by the credit, I am sure that there are many who could use it. Or you can show up on Friday in Elmsford and voice your disdain for the bill directly to Senator Schumer.

[Guest]

firemn23, just look at it this way. Our federal budget deficit is already out of control. But, as long as the Chinese Central Bank keeps buying most of the debt issued by Uncle Sam (recycling the cash from all the stuff we buy from them...) we'll be OK. Sad state of affairs but true.

If Washington and the Congress can reduce the pork-barrel projects just a little tiny bit, I'm sure cash will be found to help 1st responders.

[CFD320 35]

I am not opposed to the idea of the government giving back to 1st responders. My original point here was that we shouldn’t put Schumer up on a pedestal for proposing this. Mainly because Representative Maurice Hinchey actually came up with the idea and just enlisted Schumer because of his name recognition. Now Schumer gets all the credit. I would be a complete idiot if I didn't take the credit because I and the rest of you will be paying for it either way.

Well, anyway sorry again for the bad info I spewed.

[Guest]

CFD320, you are right in not having Schumer get all the credit.

The same bill was introduced in the House under H.R. 934 by U.S. Representatives Hinchey, Kildee, Goode, Owens, McNulty, Evans, Kennedy, Woolsey and Bishop.

I have edited the title of this thread and my original post to reflect this. Credit goes where credit is due. Thanks for bringing that up.

[Guest DADAY]

Your DEAD on muns. When our dads were doing it like we are now they didn't care if they were maiking anything. And many depts still dont have a retirement. like CFFD still no retirement.

[EMTbravo 312]

This thread is now closed and locked. Multiple rule violations by multiple members participating in this thread.

Multiple posts deleted and edited.