Deseret News | Typical family to get tax refund

Reader comments
Typical family to get tax refund

Why NOT? | 1:33 p.m. July 6, 2009

Hey Bernick -- You sound like this was the "government's money" to begin with! You have it all backwards. It was OUR money to begin with, and the federal government is still taxing and spending far too much-- Stimulus is too kind of a word for it. Can you say, political pay-off to friends of Obama --like ACORN? The SEIU? Enviro groups? Trial Attorneys? And the Unions deserve a special award-- getting a 60% share in "Government Motors" (GM) -- ahead of preferred stockholders. Now there's a deal! Hate the attitude though that it was gov'ts money.

Anonymous | 1:44 p.m. July 6, 2009

Where are the tea baggers? lol.

hmmmmm | 2:05 p.m. July 6, 2009

really funny anonymous....I bet you'll be the first in line with your wallet open when the country goes bankrupt....right? Taxes, whether hidden or right in the open is not the argument a good conservative makes. The argument is the government usurping powers they do NOT have and growing bigger literally every second of every day. Red and blue alike have spun a web to tangled to escape from. The U.S. government has grown larger under every president from the inception of this nation. Now some of that has to do with population growth, however, the majority its just uncontrolled growth and spending. We need the government to be more thrifty. Stop spending money we don't have. I bet most people would take a few years of hard times over a future filled with doubt and the ever growing prospect of having one of 2 things happen: 1. We become like socialized countries in the U.S with 50% or greater tax burdens 2. The Chinese call in the debts and then what.

Comments continue below

@Why not--- | 2:56 p.m. July 6, 2009

WAAAAAH WAAAAAAH Go read Scott McClellan's book, "What Happened".
Read about real corruption, back door politics and dishonesty during the Bush years. Then come back and complain about the mere 6 months that President Obama has been truly leading the nation.
It took 8 years for the Cheney/Bush Administration to put us here when they came into power after inheriting a SURPLUS IN THE TREASURY from the Clinton years.
You want to throw mud "why not"? Throw it where it is deserved my friend. Find Dick Cheney, GW Bush and the rest of the clowns that were in power the previous 8 years and then come crying with your pretty hands covered in mud------

jfs | 3:09 p.m. July 6, 2009

everybody already is getting the refund, its buried in the withholding tables your employer uses to calculate the federal income tax they withhold.

Forgotten Man | 3:35 p.m. July 6, 2009

So now there are more net takers than net givers. Bad sign!

Anonymous | 5:57 p.m. July 6, 2009

so now stephenson, van tassel and their ilk are going to complain that the gov is giving us our money back?

This truly shows their colors.

Just hate mongers.

They hate public ed, democrats, anything that isn't far right wackiness.

Anonymous | 5:57 p.m. July 6, 2009

I'll be sending my check back.
I don't believe in socialism.

Ken Goddard | 6:17 p.m. July 6, 2009

This is nothing more than robbing Peter to pay Paul. Eventually all you will have is a very broke and sore Peter. The real shame is not edgecating our chillin by raising house taxes. But what the heck, being right down there with Mississippi, we at least have some good company.

re: re:@why not | 6:51 p.m. July 6, 2009

What democratic koolaid have you been drinking? Bill Clinton and his idiotic policy of subprime mortgages "for everyone to have a piece of the american dream" is the genesis of this mess. It has absolutely nothing to do with Bush and Cheney. Any idiot who has a clue could figure that out.

nobama just keeps spending all of us into oblivion with all his grand "government will save you plans".

Last time I checked on the govt administerd plans it has:

SS scheduled to bankrupt

Medicare scheduled to go bankrupt

Govt (we) are already so far in debt it can never be repaid.

So of course nobamas plan is to perpetuate the myth that we can be saved by BORROWING EVEN MORE MONEY!!!!

The govt would do well to teach people to be prudent and not excessively borrow for WANTS but oh no--spend spend spend.

We all know that nobamas plan is not working as shown by unemployment and economic results when he himself said it would. Biden trots out the apology.

I'm glad because his obscene health scare spending plan will fail now. Lucky for all of us.

Something else we cant afford!!!

Legislate dont operate!!!!!

Don | 6:53 p.m. July 6, 2009

The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other peoples money. Margret Thatcher. So who is going to pay for everything? What ever happened to the balanced budget. Love California? Look out it is coming to a neighborhood near you!

Re @ | 7:02 p.m. July 6, 2009

So you resort to petty insults and name calling when you have no argument?

First of all, Cheney and Bush, as you call it, did NOT inherit a surplus. This is a constant misnomer that gets bandied around by political hacks and power brokers.

This so called surplus was said to be near a trillion or more, but after just six months it was now a deficit of 350 billion? Excuse me?

That "surplus" was based on cooked books and faulty wall street analysis that was done one year prior to Bush taking office. Since that faulty analysis, it was discovered that wall street was over valued by as much as 800 percent, causing your "surplus" to actually be a deficit, because there would be no excess taxes collected to create such a surplus.

Now you tack on 9/11 and two wars, and you get a different picture.

Now ON to Obama, he has in just six months managed to run up and promise to run up the deficit in just one year to a level that exceeds 8 years of Bush! And that includes the war funding!

Get your head on straight man, before you lose it!

That's great but...... | 8:56 p.m. July 6, 2009

The State of Utah will more than make up for the tax difference.

D | 9:44 p.m. July 6, 2009

It does not matter how much we argue this. We are doomed and will never recover. Our politicians, both sides, have assassinated this country.

KM | 10:26 p.m. July 6, 2009

Oooops, the feds don't have any money to send back to the workers in this country. Where are they getting the money? printing and borrowing. So, they will continue to do what govt. does best, spend our money. And we will continue to do what we do best, make money for them to spend.

Obama vs All Presidents | 10:51 p.m. July 6, 2009

In Obama's fist few months in office he spent or proposed spending as much as all presidents combined from Wastington through GW Bush. Where is that money coming from for the tax refund. Shell games. And as the first poster said it was our money to begin with.

Re: Anonymous | 5:57 | 10:55 p.m. July 6, 2009

Don't send the check back, they'll just use it for something stupid. Donate it to anything that opposes Obama's socialist agenda.

Anonymous | 2:22 a.m. July 7, 2009

Go Obama! go socialism! Down with Fascist Republican policies! Down with HATE!

Misleading informantion | 4:57 a.m. July 7, 2009

The article makes it sound like people are getting a gift from government in a refund. What a refund is for is overpaying taxes in the first place. Many people overpay their taxes to avoid costly and expensive fines and penalties if they haven't paid enough. Overpaying their taxes is much easier than having to come up with hundreds or thousands of dollars when taxes are due.

The only exception to income taxes are the illegal individuals and business that don't pay income taxes or file returns. Employing illegals and paying them under the table is a lucrative tax evasion incentive for employers.

Refunds are not the government giving money away, they have this excess money and must return the excess taxes by law. Most states and government count on these excess taxes to use throughout the year to spend so they are enjoying this while they have it. Look what these excess in paid taxes did to many states this year, they spent the excess and didn't have the money to return the refunds.

If everyone stopped paying excessive income taxes and only paid the minimum many states would be in foreclosure and bankrupt immediately.

Red Neck | 5:59 a.m. July 7, 2009

I have nothing good to say about the Republican Party, Especially those in Utah.
They are all behind the times by 100 years.
Education is the main problem, Failure to learn the U,S Constitution and the 27 Ammendments that protect the People from Bad Government.
Failure to learn that Utah is a Federal Criminal Run State.
We have Rules how to do things given by our Fore Fathers.
Wisdom now being forgotten.

Invest it in home efficiency | 7:14 a.m. July 7, 2009

@ Anonymous who plans to send the refund back to the federal government -- here's a better choice:

Invest it into energy efficiency in your home. That $300-plus refund is enough to switch out your incandescent bulbs for CLFs and to seal up your heating/cooling air ducts in your house. Caulking windows and insulating electrical outlets are some cheapest ways to cure the biggest house leakages in Utah's summer and winters. Not only will you see an immediate drop in your energy bills, you'll see those decreases for years to come!

With the cap and trade coming, which will increase the average household's energy bills by $175 a year by 2020, NOW is the time to start working on finding ways to avoid that cost increase.

Efficiency is the least expensive mechanism for addressing America's energy situation. And it has the biggest payoff!

Instead of sending your refund back to the feds, which will use it to pay our military to escort oil tankers out of Iran and Iraq, invest that money on your own energy independence!

Lets be real | 7:33 a.m. July 7, 2009

The real crooks in the game The Bush and his Rich Friends! They rob from the poor to give to the rich! Wake up Utah! I don't agree with all the Obama Administration is doing either. But He did not get us in this mess! Bush and Cheney and the Greedy have got us here! Take the Excessive greed of the oil company's from which is Bush family has so profited in the last 8 years. Having Daddy Bush be the front man for the Saudi's. The Oil Co's keep making record profits from the struggle of the average man trying to place food on the table. Greed will be the downfall of this country. We need to help each other and quit turning our backs on family and friends! May God help us to be more God like and help others. If that is being socialist then so be it I'd much rather be considered God Like than Greedy worthless Rich %$#%^#%^%. Bring Back God into your Life and help others! Or this Country is Doomed !

Anonymous | 7:37 a.m. July 7, 2009

They complain about taxes, then complain about a tax cut. It's about the GOP getting power, and for the benefit of the wealthy. They certainly don't care about middle America, which is most of us here in Utah. And they outright lie about the President and his policies. I'm saying it here and now, the GOP is a fraud, and as an LDS member, they disgust me. They speak of religious Christian principles, but their hearts are far from those principles.

Deb | 7:58 a.m. July 7, 2009

I will wait and see. Last year we were suppose to get the $1200 stimulus but instead we got a letter saying the money was not avaliable and it would come with this year's refund. Wellllll, this year our refund is still waiting to come but we got a letter that saying last years would again not be included but would come seperately later in the year. I'm not holding my breath.

Re: Anonymous 7:37 | 8:09 a.m. July 7, 2009

What tax cut? A single, one-time payment of a measley $356 is now a "tax cut"?

At least when George Bush gave back extra money he made it worthwhile: His one-time stimulus payment in 2002 was $1,800.

For the past 5 years my working-class family has received a real tax cut from President Bush, one that has actually helped me. Too bad Barack Obama and the Democrats will take it away next year.

This is perhaps what bugs me most about the Obamites and their starry-eyed Hopeychangey faith in The One: Their willful ignorance of reality in order to maintain their cherished illusions.

Grover | 8:34 a.m. July 7, 2009

Since we are "spreading the pain" ala joe the plumber in becoming a European socialist economy, I don't see why non drinkers should escape the burden of the liquor tax. No pain, no gain.

Chad | 8:39 a.m. July 7, 2009

I don't want a tax cut. I want much less spending which will lower taxes. Stop taking over my life.

A tax cut for the middle class and tax increases on the rich is and underhanded political trick to get votes improve approval ratings. STOP THE CORRUPTION! DO IT THE RIGHT WAY! BE FAIR!

NotFromUtar | 8:43 a.m. July 7, 2009

What this Liberal doesn't understand is that you may not be taxing me more, but you are taxing my boss more. Which means I am less likely to get paid more or receive better benefits!

K | 9:00 a.m. July 7, 2009

And lawyers and universities aren't bleedy the country dry? They like the oil companies see record profits and drive up the affordability of healthcare and price of education way more than the oil companies and over a longer period of time. Some years oil companies don't make money.

The carbon credit money, where has that gone? Instead of oil companies from time to time making a huge profit it will be the alternative energy companies all the time as government mandates will see to. Do you really think we are doing more than reallocating who makes a huge profit?

The federal government spending on defense in war time is mandated in the constitution. It's something to go into debt over if necessary to succeed.

Umm, yeah | 9:02 a.m. July 7, 2009

I see the O-bots are out in force today...

Borrowing money we don't have and don't have the future ability to repay is a bad idea. Spending more in six months than all the previous administrations combined for over 200 years is a bad idea. Coming up with new entitlements costing many billions (and perhaps trillions) such as a "right" to health care via Obamacare is a bad idea. Spending money on unconstitutional stuff is a bad idea. Government growing by leaps and bounds while the private sector shrinks is a bad idea. Government ownership of manufacturing concerns is a bad idea (USSR anyone?).

And both political parties are to blame. Republicans talk like conservatives want them to, and then turn around and act like Democrats. It's no wonder the country threw the bums out - if you're going to act just like the other party, you might as well elect the real thing. Pity they threw the bums out, only to get even worse bums. 99% of the people running for office these days are power hungry narcissists.

observing | 9:17 a.m. July 7, 2009

The U.S. has been in debt since just after the Revolutionary War. The problem is that we've never really gotten serious about getting out of debt. We just keep going further into it and no one seems to believe that we can reach a bottom. We can. That's when the U.S. ceases to be an independent country. That's when taxes will go up to 50% or more of what we earn. The day is coming.

Steve | 10:59 a.m. July 7, 2009

I can't wait until you people will have no one to blame but OBAMA. go ahead an blame bush for another year or so but sooner or later your going to have to start blaming someone else.

I think when people are hit with the $3,000 dollar Cap and Trade bill each year per family and when you are charge for your carbon footprint, many people both Democrat, Republican, and so on will not be to pleased.

When you find that to register your old vehicle it now costs you 100% more per year, many people who can not afford a new car are going to ask why their taxes have gone up when they were promised that only the people making more than 250,000 would be affected. (Now in Affect)

You want to sell your home. Now a government official will show up and charge you a fee to inspect your home. If it doesn't meet standards you are forced to pay to upgrade. Hey, I thought the new taxes were only going to affect those making 250,000 or more. WRONG. Stay tuned much more to come.

GWB & National Debt | 11:36 a.m. July 7, 2009

The following article appeared on CBS News website just as the economic crisis started to unfold in Sept. 08.

With no fanfare and little notice, the national debt has grown by more than $4 trillion during George W. Bush’s presidency.

It’s the biggest increase under any president in U.S history.

On the day President Bush took office, the national debt stood at $5.727 trillion. The latest number from the Treasury Department shows the national debt now stands at more than $9.849 trillion. That’s a 71.9 percent increase on Mr. Bush’s watch.

The bailout plan now pending in Congress could add hundreds of billions of dollars to the national debt — though President Bush said this morning he expects that over time, much if not all of the bailout money will be paid back.

DON'T TRY TO TELL ME IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH GWB!!!

MOM | 11:52 a.m. July 7, 2009

How can you afford a 231000$ home on 63000 a year? That is what I make and there is no way I could afford that and still have enough to enjoy my life.

@MOM | 12:19 p.m. July 7, 2009

We got approved over 4 years ago for $190K house on $45K/year. I was working too at the time, but they didn't take my income into account. Crazy, huh?

lost in DC | 12:57 p.m. July 7, 2009

@why not 6:51. slick willy deserves no credit for an almost balanced budget (treasury was still borrowing from social security, but privately held debt did decline). he shut the government down three times because the congress did not run as large a deficit as he wanted.

GWB & naitonal debt 11:36, you say the debt increased $4 trillion during GWB's watch, that's $500 million per year. yes, that's a horrible number. but it is only 1/4 the size of BO's current rate of $2 trillion per year. Are you saying the salt GWB put in our water justifies the arsenic BO is putting in it (to use a metaphore)? Still can't get over the fact that BO is spending our future much more rapidly than GWB ever did, can you?

More sensible thinking | 1:10 p.m. July 7, 2009

Re Mom: Have you stopped to think about this for a minute? It doesn't mean that someone spent $231,000 for a home on a $63,000 income this year. It is just the average house appraisal in Utah. My parents bought their first house in the early 1970's for $20,000 and it is now worth $300,000. I agree that during the housing boom people were getting approved to buy a home without the proper income, but that doesn't mean you can do that now. As a rule of thumb, you cannot buy a house for more than your yearly gross income multiplied by a factor of three. In other words, if you make $50,000 per year, you should qualify for a $150,000 loan assuming that your credit is good.

progressive | 1:15 p.m. July 7, 2009

The issue is simple, marginal tax rates for everyone have trended down over history. Bottom incomes have seen their rates drop from 20% to 10% and top incomes have seen theirs drop from 91% to 35%. Consequesntly as society in general has seen fit to socialize some of the risks in lilfe monies have been scarce to fund these activities and deficits have grown. Most on this blog foolishly believe that they can manage these risks in life all by themselves so feel government should stay out of their pockets. However, when your health and welfare and ability to provide for yourself in your later years are both tied to an unstable job market you are making a bet that you will surely loose as time goes on. De-coupling some if not all of those risks from employment and then paying for them with a more historicly relevant tax rate is both sane and just.

I am curious | 1:26 p.m. July 7, 2009

why all of the blame for excessive taxes and spending is aimed at presidents. Lets not forget Congress. All spending bills must originate in the House of Representatives. The president cannot spend more than they appropriate. Taxes are passed by Congress, not enacted by president. There is a reason why Chris Cannon is no longer cooling his heels in Washington. He will soon be joined by Bennett and then Hatch. They will be punished for their role in the debt of the Bush years.

What a joke! | 1:47 p.m. July 7, 2009

The Utah Taxpayer Association is a lobby group run by Howard Stephenson. It has a clear agenda in which some of it has little to do with saving taxpayers money. It is a gross conflict of interest for a current, sitting, elected official to be a part of a lobby group. It is clearly anti-public education and exaggerates facts and statistics in order to meet a certain set of objectives in that area. The name Utah Taxpayers Association seems innocuous, but it is not necessarily on the side of the Utah Taxpayer. For instance, under the so-called flat tax, my taxes skyrocketed as did most other people's taxes according to my accountant. So whose taxes came down? The ultra-wealthy got the breaks that the rest of us paid for. Wake-up Utah! This organization is going to ruin the state eventually. We have already been passed by Puerto Rico (a third world protectorate) in education, and I expect things to get worse under the advice of the Utah Taxpayers Association.

Huhh? | 1:53 p.m. July 7, 2009

If I get a refund it means I did not pay federal taxes? Usually that means that I witheld more than I was required to pay. I still paid. What am I missing here.

To Progressive | 1:54 p.m. July 7, 2009

There is one error in your argument. You assume that government can do things more effectively and efficiently than the private sector. --NEVER HAS HAPPENED

Revenue Source | 1:54 p.m. July 7, 2009

How about taking away the child tax credit and let those who have the kids actually pay for raising and educating them?

Grover | 3:08 p.m. July 7, 2009

I read a compromise suggestion for the mess in California that I think would be great for Utah: For those districts whose reps vote for a tax increase to close the budget hole, those districts pay their proportion of the needed tax. For those districts whose reps oppose increases, they would need to come up with spending cuts for their district that equalled the revenue shortfall. Everyone gets what they want.

I suppose | 3:10 p.m. July 7, 2009

. . . it's supposed to be good news that a family earning $63K+ pays no tax.

It's not. It would only be good news if the government were not going to spend the money they would have collected from them.

We all know that'll never happen.

If $60K-somethings pay no tax, and we have to find trillions in new revenues to pay for socialized medicine, cap and tax, etc., etc., etc. -- where do you think it's going to come from?

Their good news is my really BAD news! It simply means I have to pay their tax -- and then some. A very charitable thing to do, granted, but where were they when I made $30K? I paid plenty in taxes then.

If the median taxpayer pays no tax, it means ALL taxes are paid by half -- or less -- of the population. That means, half the population of this Nation could not care less how confiscatory Democrat taxes become -- it just doesn't affect them!

As a famous Russian comedian once said, "What a country!"

GWB & National Debt | 3:19 p.m. July 7, 2009

to Lost in DC 12:57

Are you incapable of understanding the point here?

The national debt under George W. Bush's presidency grew by more than $4 trillion.

It’s the BIGGEST INCREASE UNDER ANY PRESIDENT IN US HISTORY.

Point number 2: There is a time to spend and there is a time not to spend. Even GWB's advisors realized the danger of not spending as the economy began to tank. It scares me to death to think where the US economy would be today with a Republican administration trying to solve the problem with TAX CUTS! It would be like trying to put out a fire with gasoline. This administration has some very capable economic advisors who have the confidence, in the most part, of Nobel prize winner Paul Krugman. I trust the advice the administration is getting.

Re; GWB & National Debt | 3:31 p.m. July 7, 2009

Pssst: You know that 4 trillion dollars that President Bush added to the national debt?

Barack Obama's OWN projections show him adding another 5.5 trillion to the national debt during his first term, and another 5 trillion on top of that if he gets re-elected.

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office is even more pessimistic, predicting over 6 trillion dollars in new debt to pay for one term of Hope and Change.

Since both are based on the wildly optimistic assumption that the economy will boom in a couple of years, the reality is the deficits will be even bigger.

I realize that many Obama voters have problems with accepting responsibility, but just stamping your feet and screaming "It's all Bush's fault!" is not a viable strategy for dealing with our financial problems.

Very Ironic | 3:39 p.m. July 7, 2009

I find it so Ironic that the Government criticizes individuals who live beyond their means when The Government is the Biggest Deficit Spender around! Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. This stimulus bill is equivalent to maxing out a credit card and hoping others will pay it off. Way to go Obama. Let the free markets work this mess out and punish the greedy. Quit bailing them out!

Bathtub | 4:46 p.m. July 7, 2009

Mr. Bernick, I sorry this is just like sitting in a bathtub & having the government dipping water from behind me then pouring it back in front of me & saying "See, we are giving you more water in your bathtub, so you should be happy & grateful to us for taking care of you!"

Taking money from others to redistribute, in the form of a tax refund, is THEFT! I don't want somebody elses hard earned monies given to me, just to force equallity.

"Whenever I hear any one arguing for slavery I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally." - Abraham Lincoln .... Just replace the idea about slavery with taxing/redistribution of wealth.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.