Just did taxes...annoyed. Other people in the same boat?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel stupid. How are you calculating this change? I paid more this year than last year, but income increased too--so of course I paid more. Are you just calculating the overall percent of taxes paid to income?

Our refund is half what it usually is (I like the forced savings, so it is usually $5-6k and pays for our vacations for the year), but this year it is only $3k.

This is almost exactly us and we always use the return for vacations, also. HHI @180k with 3 kids and got dicked over by the SALT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh well, you owe the same amount anyway, so what’s the big deal? Yes, we also got hit with a big end of the year tax bill, but our overall taxes went way down, so I really see no reason to complain. The difference is we didn’t give the government a no interest loan for once, instead they gave us one!

You are not a drama queen.

OP is.

Well, some people's taxes didn't go way down overall. We are paying more and our HHI is under 200k.

[Anonymous]

We have our withholding set up as 0 exemptions plus an additional withholding of around $175 each per pay period (every other week). So we have to withhold around $700/month additional to not owe taxes. Obviously if we did not withhold that additional amount we would owe quite a bit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm personally suprised by the people who say they are owing even with 0 withholdings. Did you all change to 0 half-way through the year? Are you sure you were actually at 0?

I had a large salary increase this year, so, not only did I withhold 0, like I usually do, I withheld extra, approximately equal to my increase in salary times the top marginal rate - I didn't want to take any chances. I owe a /huge/ amount. No penalties, as I withheld more than I owed last year, but a very unpleasant surprise.

[Anonymous]

Yes, it's going to happen to a lot of middle class people this year. If you are extremely rich or completely impoverished, the tax changes may have helped you. Otherwise, no.

[Anonymous]

It’s zero exemptions. You took zero exemptions. Not zero “withholding.” A person taking zero exemptions actually withholds more than someone taking more exemptions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s zero exemptions. You took zero exemptions. Not zero “withholding.” A person taking zero exemptions actually withholds more than someone taking more exemptions.

It is just short hand. Don’t be pedantic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm personally suprised by the people who say they are owing even with 0 withholdings. Did you all change to 0 half-way through the year? Are you sure you were actually at 0?

it's the withholding tables that were the problem that payroll based deduction off of. clearly you do not understand how taxes work. Additionally if you have 2 earners and they is a vast discrepancy in earnings, then the tax tables for withholding will be different, but at filing will cause you to owe.

The ignorance on this board sometimes makes me want to smash my head on my computer and then weep for our nation.

Well that's kind of my point - why would the withholding tables be so far off? Previously they were biased in favor of overwithholding. My understanding that the current tweak was aimed to get them closer to 0 liability -- not people owing $1000s, like they are stating here. I'm wondering how the IRS got it so wrong, since I doubt their intent was that people would owe $1000s with 0 exemptions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s zero exemptions. You took zero exemptions. Not zero “withholding.” A person taking zero exemptions actually withholds more than someone taking more exemptions.

It is just short hand. Don’t be pedantic.

Actually it's worth getting the terminology straight. I was wondering if "allowances" and "exemptions" are the same thing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm personally suprised by the people who say they are owing even with 0 withholdings. Did you all change to 0 half-way through the year? Are you sure you were actually at 0?

it's the withholding tables that were the problem that payroll based deduction off of. clearly you do not understand how taxes work. Additionally if you have 2 earners and they is a vast discrepancy in earnings, then the tax tables for withholding will be different, but at filing will cause you to owe.

The ignorance on this board sometimes makes me want to smash my head on my computer and then weep for our nation.

Well that's kind of my point - why would the withholding tables be so far off? Previously they were biased in favor of overwithholding. My understanding that the current tweak was aimed to get them closer to 0 liability -- not people owing $1000s, like they are stating here. I'm wondering how the IRS got it so wrong, since I doubt their intent was that people would owe $1000s with 0 exemptions.

No. This was intentional. It was to make people think the tax “cuts” were great and get people to vote for the GOP in the midterms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm personally suprised by the people who say they are owing even with 0 withholdings. Did you all change to 0 half-way through the year? Are you sure you were actually at 0?

it's the withholding tables that were the problem that payroll based deduction off of. clearly you do not understand how taxes work. Additionally if you have 2 earners and they is a vast discrepancy in earnings, then the tax tables for withholding will be different, but at filing will cause you to owe.

The ignorance on this board sometimes makes me want to smash my head on my computer and then weep for our nation.

Well that's kind of my point - why would the withholding tables be so far off? Previously they were biased in favor of overwithholding. My understanding that the current tweak was aimed to get them closer to 0 liability -- not people owing $1000s, like they are stating here. I'm wondering how the IRS got it so wrong, since I doubt their intent was that people would owe $1000s with 0 exemptions.

No. This was intentional. It was to make people think the tax “cuts” were great and get people to vote for the GOP in the midterms.

Yup. And how'd that work out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm personally suprised by the people who say they are owing even with 0 withholdings. Did you all change to 0 half-way through the year? Are you sure you were actually at 0?

it's the withholding tables that were the problem that payroll based deduction off of. clearly you do not understand how taxes work. Additionally if you have 2 earners and they is a vast discrepancy in earnings, then the tax tables for withholding will be different, but at filing will cause you to owe.

The ignorance on this board sometimes makes me want to smash my head on my computer and then weep for our nation.

Well that's kind of my point - why would the withholding tables be so far off? Previously they were biased in favor of overwithholding. My understanding that the current tweak was aimed to get them closer to 0 liability -- not people owing $1000s, like they are stating here. I'm wondering how the IRS got it so wrong, since I doubt their intent was that people would owe $1000s with 0 exemptions.

No. This was intentional. It was to make people think the tax “cuts” were great and get people to vote for the GOP in the midterms.

Keep dreamin'

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm personally suprised by the people who say they are owing even with 0 withholdings. Did you all change to 0 half-way through the year? Are you sure you were actually at 0?

it's the withholding tables that were the problem that payroll based deduction off of. clearly you do not understand how taxes work. Additionally if you have 2 earners and they is a vast discrepancy in earnings, then the tax tables for withholding will be different, but at filing will cause you to owe.

The ignorance on this board sometimes makes me want to smash my head on my computer and then weep for our nation.

Well that's kind of my point - why would the withholding tables be so far off? Previously they were biased in favor of overwithholding. My understanding that the current tweak was aimed to get them closer to 0 liability -- not people owing $1000s, like they are stating here. I'm wondering how the IRS got it so wrong, since I doubt their intent was that people would owe $1000s with 0 exemptions.

No. This was intentional. It was to make people think the tax “cuts” were great and get people to vote for the GOP in the midterms.

I work for the IRS and I can assure there is not grand right wing conspiracy going on. It is too exhausting to explain what is obvious to the masses of conspiracy theorists on here, but all I can say is that there is no conspiracy going on by the executive branch. tax reform was rushed, and as a result the tables were sloppy. But carry on as if this tax season were a episode of X-files.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A vote for republicans is a vote for taking money out of the pockets of the middle class and giving it to millionaires/billionaires

No, that was Obamacare, stealing people from the middle class to make pharma and insurers dirty rich.

Tax reform has given us the healthiest economy and labor market in decades.

Our economy is not healthy and certainly not as stable as it was two years ago, and it wasn't great then. And the labor market is totally stagnant where wages are concerned. Sure, the stock market is still around 25,000, same as this time last year.

[Anonymous]

Same income last year to this year, no where near the highest tax bracket. We owe significantly more than before.

Thanks GOP.