Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Really, I am just annoyed when people on this forum dismiss childcare expenses when talking about HHI.

Think about it this way, OP. In your system SAHMs would be taxed for their labor - meaning in reality that their DHs would be taxed.

However, if someone decides to have a non-working spouse at any other point in their life - that labor is not taxed. Your solution is to create a tax on families? That makes no sense.

OP here. No. I was being much more petty than that. In my system, about 1/3 of the salary (to a reasonable extent) would be added to the HHI of a family with a SAHP when having these discussions about UMC vs MC.
I really never meant to say that SAHMs should be taxed. I was responding to someone who took my OP bass ackwards.

But I do feel that most childcare costs ought to be pre-tax. The current system is unfair to both working mothers and childcare workers because often the amount people are able to pay for childcare is based on the parent’s after tax pay.

Your post is absurd. You get tax credits for child care costs that a SAHP does not get. As a SAHP, when my child was 5, we did a 9-3 preschool to get them prepared and they missed the cut off. Before that we had preschool costs. It is absolutely fair as children are a choice and you should not get subsidized.

Some of us don't work as child care is more than our income.

The tax credits barely cover any childcare. I am not arguing that childcare is not a choice, but rather maybe we should incentivize more women to work by not having them pay tax on their childcare payments.

I don't think we should make it an incentive. You choose to be a parent. You pay the expenses involved. Paying taxes on your child care payments is a minimal amount.

Depends on where you live. Daycare/preschool for two kids ran us $40K/year. We were in the 25% tax bracket at the time, so less the $6K that we got to deduct or take the credit for, that was $8500 in taxes that we would not have had to pay if the FSA limits matched current childcare costs. We made $130K at the time, so that was not minimal at all for us.

OP, this was your question: How does unpaid labor figure into HHI?
The clear answer is: unpaid labor doesn't figure into HHI. It is absurd to think it should.
My DH is great DIYer. He spent a lot of his free time last year doing remodeling projects on our home.
We could have hired a contractor to do the jobs but doing it himself we saved ten of thousands of $.
Should we add that saving to our HHI? and pay taxes on it?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Really, I am just annoyed when people on this forum dismiss childcare expenses when talking about HHI.

Think about it this way, OP. In your system SAHMs would be taxed for their labor - meaning in reality that their DHs would be taxed.

However, if someone decides to have a non-working spouse at any other point in their life - that labor is not taxed. Your solution is to create a tax on families? That makes no sense.

OP here. No. I was being much more petty than that. In my system, about 1/3 of the salary (to a reasonable extent) would be added to the HHI of a family with a SAHP when having these discussions about UMC vs MC.
I really never meant to say that SAHMs should be taxed. I was responding to someone who took my OP bass ackwards.

But I do feel that most childcare costs ought to be pre-tax. The current system is unfair to both working mothers and childcare workers because often the amount people are able to pay for childcare is based on the parent’s after tax pay.

Your post is absurd. You get tax credits for child care costs that a SAHP does not get. As a SAHP, when my child was 5, we did a 9-3 preschool to get them prepared and they missed the cut off. Before that we had preschool costs. It is absolutely fair as children are a choice and you should not get subsidized.

Some of us don't work as child care is more than our income.

The tax credits barely cover any childcare. I am not arguing that childcare is not a choice, but rather maybe we should incentivize more women to work by not having them pay tax on their childcare payments.

I don't think we should make it an incentive. You choose to be a parent. You pay the expenses involved. Paying taxes on your child care payments is a minimal amount.

SAHP choose to be parents too but only one of us gets taxed for childcare. I think we should end that. That’s my point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Really, I am just annoyed when people on this forum dismiss childcare expenses when talking about HHI.

Think about it this way, OP. In your system SAHMs would be taxed for their labor - meaning in reality that their DHs would be taxed.

However, if someone decides to have a non-working spouse at any other point in their life - that labor is not taxed. Your solution is to create a tax on families? That makes no sense.

OP here. No. I was being much more petty than that. In my system, about 1/3 of the salary (to a reasonable extent) would be added to the HHI of a family with a SAHP when having these discussions about UMC vs MC.
I really never meant to say that SAHMs should be taxed. I was responding to someone who took my OP bass ackwards.

But I do feel that most childcare costs ought to be pre-tax. The current system is unfair to both working mothers and childcare workers because often the amount people are able to pay for childcare is based on the parent’s after tax pay.

Your post is absurd. You get tax credits for child care costs that a SAHP does not get. As a SAHP, when my child was 5, we did a 9-3 preschool to get them prepared and they missed the cut off. Before that we had preschool costs. It is absolutely fair as children are a choice and you should not get subsidized.

Some of us don't work as child care is more than our income.

The tax credits barely cover any childcare. I am not arguing that childcare is not a choice, but rather maybe we should incentivize more women to work by not having them pay tax on their childcare payments.

I don't think we should make it an incentive. You choose to be a parent. You pay the expenses involved. Paying taxes on your child care payments is a minimal amount.

Anonymous wrote:I’m only annoyed that SAHMs will get social security from their husbands income plus their husbands will get their own social security. Nothing else bothers me about it. I love my children and am an attentive and loving mother but I wouldn’t be a good sahm.

You do realize some of us worked 15+ years before becoming SAHP's so we earned our own social security and have fully paid in to be vested. I started working/early credits as an early teen so by the time I was a SAHP in my mid-30's I paid in plenty. Why do you resent it? You could do the same thing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Really, I am just annoyed when people on this forum dismiss childcare expenses when talking about HHI.

Think about it this way, OP. In your system SAHMs would be taxed for their labor - meaning in reality that their DHs would be taxed.

However, if someone decides to have a non-working spouse at any other point in their life - that labor is not taxed. Your solution is to create a tax on families? That makes no sense.

OP here. No. I was being much more petty than that. In my system, about 1/3 of the salary (to a reasonable extent) would be added to the HHI of a family with a SAHP when having these discussions about UMC vs MC.
I really never meant to say that SAHMs should be taxed. I was responding to someone who took my OP bass ackwards.

But I do feel that most childcare costs ought to be pre-tax. The current system is unfair to both working mothers and childcare workers because often the amount people are able to pay for childcare is based on the parent’s after tax pay.

Your post is absurd. You get tax credits for child care costs that a SAHP does not get. As a SAHP, when my child was 5, we did a 9-3 preschool to get them prepared and they missed the cut off. Before that we had preschool costs. It is absolutely fair as children are a choice and you should not get subsidized.

Some of us don't work as child care is more than our income.

OP here, and my point is that you ARE working. It’s ridiculous to dismiss that.

No, I am not working. I am taking care of my family, which is a lifestyle choice.

I’m only annoyed that SAHMs will get social security from their husbands income plus their husbands will get their own social security. Nothing else bothers me about it. I love my children and am an attentive and loving mother but I wouldn’t be a good sahm.

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Really, I am just annoyed when people on this forum dismiss childcare expenses when talking about HHI.

You can pay with time or you can pay with money. Some people have one or the other and some people have both. Some families make different budget priorities and others make different choices about how they spend their time.

Take kids out of it. I don’t clean my own house or do any lawn care. I pay for that to be done out of my income. What about people who choose to spend time instead? Same goes for laundry, meal prep, car maintenance, home repairs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Really, I am just annoyed when people on this forum dismiss childcare expenses when talking about HHI.

Think about it this way, OP. In your system SAHMs would be taxed for their labor - meaning in reality that their DHs would be taxed.

However, if someone decides to have a non-working spouse at any other point in their life - that labor is not taxed. Your solution is to create a tax on families? That makes no sense.

OP here. No. I was being much more petty than that. In my system, about 1/3 of the salary (to a reasonable extent) would be added to the HHI of a family with a SAHP when having these discussions about UMC vs MC.
I really never meant to say that SAHMs should be taxed. I was responding to someone who took my OP bass ackwards.

But I do feel that most childcare costs ought to be pre-tax. The current system is unfair to both working mothers and childcare workers because often the amount people are able to pay for childcare is based on the parent’s after tax pay.

Your post is absurd. You get tax credits for child care costs that a SAHP does not get. As a SAHP, when my child was 5, we did a 9-3 preschool to get them prepared and they missed the cut off. Before that we had preschool costs. It is absolutely fair as children are a choice and you should not get subsidized.

Some of us don't work as child care is more than our income.

The tax credits barely cover any childcare. I am not arguing that childcare is not a choice, but rather maybe we should incentivize more women to work by not having them pay tax on their childcare payments.

There is an easy way to do this--increase the child and dependent care tax credit (currently at $6K for 2+ kids) to something on par with the actual costs of full-time care for young children in HCOL areas. You're only eligible for that if you and your spouse both work, so that's effectively subsidizing the cost of care. But there sadly isn't much political will to do this.

SAHPs are working, yes, but they are losing out on things like retirement and Social Security, so it makes no sense to levy a tax on their time when they aren't being paid (not to mention that it would be all but impossible to do). But if, say, you apply for financial aid at a private school, many do "add" income for a SAHP if all kids are school-age with no special needs that require a parent to be home.

I think you really need to think like the rich and realize that people like you shouldn't pay taxes on anything. Problem solved.

Anonymous wrote:Having kids is a choice and a luxury. Why should child care be discussed with HII. Its your choice how you choose to care for your kids. What reaction are you looking for? Kids are expensive.

Having children and raising them to be productive members of the workforce is a boon and a service to our society.'

When you are 80 who do you think will be your doctors, your nurses, your cleaners and repair people? Who will be fixing your cars and repairing the highways? Who will be driving the trucks? Who will be working and paying taxes to support the public good?

Today's kids. It is to our benefit as a society to be sure we have children being born and raised and educated.

An economist definitely didn’t write this

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Really, I am just annoyed when people on this forum dismiss childcare expenses when talking about HHI.

Think about it this way, OP. In your system SAHMs would be taxed for their labor - meaning in reality that their DHs would be taxed.

However, if someone decides to have a non-working spouse at any other point in their life - that labor is not taxed. Your solution is to create a tax on families? That makes no sense.

OP here. No. I was being much more petty than that. In my system, about 1/3 of the salary (to a reasonable extent) would be added to the HHI of a family with a SAHP when having these discussions about UMC vs MC.
I really never meant to say that SAHMs should be taxed. I was responding to someone who took my OP bass ackwards.

But I do feel that most childcare costs ought to be pre-tax. The current system is unfair to both working mothers and childcare workers because often the amount people are able to pay for childcare is based on the parent’s after tax pay.

Your post is absurd. You get tax credits for child care costs that a SAHP does not get. As a SAHP, when my child was 5, we did a 9-3 preschool to get them prepared and they missed the cut off. Before that we had preschool costs. It is absolutely fair as children are a choice and you should not get subsidized.

Some of us don't work as child care is more than our income.

The tax credits barely cover any childcare. I am not arguing that childcare is not a choice, but rather maybe we should incentivize more women to work by not having them pay tax on their childcare payments.

Anonymous wrote:How about a single teen parent who has her parent babysit her kids while also watching her siblings? Should they both pay extra taxes for that cushy arrangement, OP?

Yes. She should stop taking advantage of her mother. She should apply for a childcare voucher, pay her mom, and her mom should pay taxes in the income.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Really, I am just annoyed when people on this forum dismiss childcare expenses when talking about HHI.

Think about it this way, OP. In your system SAHMs would be taxed for their labor - meaning in reality that their DHs would be taxed.

However, if someone decides to have a non-working spouse at any other point in their life - that labor is not taxed. Your solution is to create a tax on families? That makes no sense.

OP here. No. I was being much more petty than that. In my system, about 1/3 of the salary (to a reasonable extent) would be added to the HHI of a family with a SAHP when having these discussions about UMC vs MC.
I really never meant to say that SAHMs should be taxed. I was responding to someone who took my OP bass ackwards.

But I do feel that most childcare costs ought to be pre-tax. The current system is unfair to both working mothers and childcare workers because often the amount people are able to pay for childcare is based on the parent’s after tax pay.

Your post is absurd. You get tax credits for child care costs that a SAHP does not get. As a SAHP, when my child was 5, we did a 9-3 preschool to get them prepared and they missed the cut off. Before that we had preschool costs. It is absolutely fair as children are a choice and you should not get subsidized.

Some of us don't work as child care is more than our income.

OP here, and my point is that you ARE working. It’s ridiculous to dismiss that.