Skinning: Wordpress • Invision • Expression Engine • phpBB3
How Your Taxes Are Spent
by Sandi
Post Source: MSNBC

Tax time approaches quickly, while I have been procrastinating. It looks like I will have to file for an extension again this year. Not that I owe anything, but you still get fined for late filing.

Anyway while contemplating getting started today I ran across this article. While it doesn't tell you where every dollar goes, it does a pretty good job of laying out where our money goes in easy to understand terms.

Like many tax filers, you're probably asking yourself: Just where does my money go when the government gets its hands on it?

Alas, it's not as simple a question as it may seem. For those of you who have trouble balancing your checkbook, imagine trying to keep track of where $4.1 trillion goes. That’s what was spent on your behalf at all levels of federal state and local government last year.

Even with armies of accountants and auditors, it’s hard to know with certainty exactly where your taxes ended up. For starters, you pay taxes based on a calendar year; the government spends it based on a fiscal year that begins Oct. 1. Even if the calendars matched up, the journey your tax dollars embark on depends a lot on things like how much you make, how you spend it and where you live. ....

So where did your money go after you sent it off to Tax Heaven? One way to find out is to look at the government's bills. If the government sat down at the kitchen table to try to see where its paycheck went, here’s — very roughly — where it went in 2007.

To make the math a little easier, let’s assume the government made $52,000 a year — or $1,000 a week — which is about the median household income in the U.S. (The real number was $48,200 in 2006. And keep in mind that $1,000 a week doesn’t include taxes. But you’re the government — you don’t pay taxes.)

The biggest government bill last year was for a category called “income security” ($220 of that $1,000 weekly paycheck) — which includes Social Security ($115), along with other social services like welfare ($46), disability payments ($35) and unemployment insurance ($7). The next biggest chunk went to pay for health care ($203), which includes Medicaid and Medicare.

Keeping our country — and your neighborhood — safe cost almost $200 a week, including national defense ($132), along with spending on “public order and safety” ($65), which included police ($27), prisons ($18), courts ($12) and fighting fires ($8).

Education took the next biggest slice ($158) — most of which went to pay for elementary and secondary schools ($117). Much of the rest helped pay for college ($28). About $2 a week of our $1,000 a week paycheck went to pay for public libraries.

Then there’s "general public service" — or the cost of government itself. Unfortunately, government — like many Americans — has been living beyond its means and spending more than it collects in taxes. To make up the difference, state and federal treasuries filled in the gap by selling more debt — roughly the same as you or me using our credit cards. So the biggest single component of the $143 cost of running federal, state and local government last year was the interest on the money borrowed on your behalf ($90). Think of it as the minimum monthly payment on your government’s credit card.

The cost of running all levels of government also included salaries and expenses for the executive and legislative branches ($21) and the cost of collecting taxes ($11).

After that, the bills looked pretty manageable — but then you only had about $79 left. Those bills included highways ($25), agriculture ($8) air transport ($4), air and water quality ($7) and the space program ($3). Rounding out the list were housing and community service ($10) and recreation and culture ($7).

I feel so much better now.... Not!

Posted Tuesday April 8, 2008 | Catagory: (Taxes) | Permalink
0 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
Wisconsin Attempts to Socialize Health Care
by Sandi

Based on information compiled by the federal Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Wisconsin ranks number one in the nation. As I reported early in July, the Wisconsin Democrats want to change that. Wisconsin's Democrat controlled Senate wants to raise our taxes by $15 billion (more than we raise from corporate income taxes, sales taxes and income taxes combined) to pay for this experiment of a totally government-run health care system.

When Louis Brandeis praised the 50 states as "laboratories of democracy," he didn't claim that every policy experiment would work. So we hope the eyes of America will turn to Wisconsin, and the effort by Madison Democrats to make that "progressive" state a petri dish for government-run health care.

This exercise is especially instructive, because it reveals where the "single-payer," universal coverage folks end up. Democrats who run the Wisconsin Senate have dropped the Washington pretense of incremental health-care reform and moved directly to passing a plan to insure every resident under the age of 65 in the state. And, wow, is "free" health care expensive. The plan would cost an estimated $15.2 billion, or $3 billion more than the state currently collects in all income, sales and corporate income taxes. It represents an average of $510 a month in higher taxes for every Wisconsin worker.

Employees and businesses would pay for the plan by sharing the cost of a new 14.5% employment tax on wages. Wisconsin businesses would have to compete with out-of-state businesses and foreign rivals while shouldering a 29.8% combined federal-state payroll tax, nearly double the 15.3% payroll tax paid by non-Wisconsin firms for Social Security and Medicare combined.

This employment tax is on top of the $1 billion grab bag of other levies that Democratic Governor Jim Doyle proposed and the tax-happy Senate has also approved, including a $1.25 a pack increase in the cigarette tax, a 10% hike in the corporate tax, and new fees on cars, trucks, hospitals, real estate transactions, oil companies and dry cleaners. In all, the tax burden in the Badger state could rise to 20% of family income, which is slightly more than the average federal tax burden. "At least federal taxes pay for an Army and Navy," quips R.J. Pirlot of the Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce business lobby.

As if that's not enough, the health plan includes a tax escalator clause allowing an additional 1.5 percentage point payroll tax to finance higher outlays in the future. This could bring the payroll tax to 16%. One reason to expect costs to soar is that the state may become a mecca for the unemployed, uninsured and sick from all over North America. The legislation doesn't require that you have a job in Wisconsin to qualify, merely that you live in the state for at least 12 months. Cheesehead nation could expect to attract health-care free-riders while losing productive workers who leave for less-taxing climes.

This is giving to you with one hand, while taking much more from you with the other hand. Also Wisconsin Senate Democrats want to:

Create the first child care tax deduction in state history, but increase birth certificates fees; double fees to pay child support; create a new fee for those receiving child support.

End the tax on job creation in this state, but make it more expensive to drive to work with a $270 million tax on oil companies that you pay at the pump.

Increase the tax deduction for higher education, but while increasing tuition.

Make all social security 100-percent tax free, while raising property taxes. The median home will be up $400 in this budget cycle, due to a governor Doyle veto.

Related Posts (on one page):

  1. Wisconsin Attempts to Socialize Health Care
  2. Will Wisconsin Stay On Top of the Healthcare Heap?
Posted Tuesday July 24, 2007 | Catagory: (Health/Medicine, Taxes) | Permalink
0 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
When is Penny Pinching Pork?
by Sandi

Apparently when it's in the form of tax breaks.

Democrats said the Republican plan was awash in pork-barrel projects - such as a $2.9 million property tax break for restaurant kitchen equipment - and would cripple the University of Wisconsin System.

"This is Edward Scissorhands on meth - it's cut, cut, cut, cut, cut," Rep. Jennifer Shilling (D-La Crosse) said of the UW plan.

If it becomes law, the GOP budget by mid-2009 would force the layoff of more than 1,700 teachers statewide, including 199 in Milwaukee Public Schools, Democrats said.

I wouldn't recommend holding your breath waiting for teacher layoffs because of insufficient taxes.

Via The World According to Nick.

Posted Thursday July 12, 2007 | Catagory: (Taxes) | Permalink
0 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
Are the IRS and OMB Defrauding the Public?
by Sandi

In Peoria, Illinois a man by the name of Robert Lawrence had charges brought by the government dismissed by threatening to expose the IRS’s on-going efforts to defraud the public.

Apparently the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3500 – 3520) says that no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with an agency’s collection of information request (such as a 1040 form), if the request does not display a valid control number assigned by the OMB.

In Section 3512 Congress went on to authorize that the protection provided by Section 3512 may be raised in the form of a complete defense at any time during an agency’s administrative process (such as an IRS Tax Court or Collection and Due Process Hearing) or during a judicial proceeding (such as Lawrence’s criminal trial).

In sum, the PRA requires that all government agencies display valid OMB control numbers and certain disclosures directly on all information collection forms that the public is requested to file. Lawrence's sole defense was he was not required to file an IRS Form 1040 because it displays an invalid OMB control number.

Government officials knew that if the case went to trial, it would expose the fraudulent, counterfeit 1040. They also must have known that a trial would expose the ongoing conspiracy between OMB and IRS to publish 1040 forms each year that those agencies knew were in violation of the PRA. That would raise the issue that the Form 1040, with its invalid control number, is being used by the Government to cover up the underlying constitutional tort -- that is, the enforcement of a direct, unapportioned tax on the labor of every working man, women and child in America.

Any information collection form, such as IRS Form 1040, which lacks bona fide statutory authority or which conflicts with the Constitution, cannot be issued an OMB control number. If a control number were issued for such a form, the form would be invalid and of no force and effect.

Do I have this right? The IRS form 1040 violates the federal Paperwork Reduction Act, and anyone not filing one is protected from prosecution! Or at least unless the IRS (complicit with the OMB) wants to open the Pandora’s Box of admiting to deceiving the public with fraudulent and counterfeit forms.

Posted Saturday June 10, 2006 | Catagory: (Taxes) | Permalink
0 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
Taxes Too High - We Need Campaign Finance Refrom?
by Sandi
In a survey (support for TABOR) Wisconsin voters were asked: "Would you favor or oppose a Wisconsin state constitutional amendment that would limit increases in spending by both state and local governments to the rate of inflation?"

Owen at Boots & Sabers takes the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel to task for this unbelievable remark about why Wisconsin taxpayers want TABOR:
Simply, a big reason for that has to be the dismal state of current campaign finance law - which gives all the appearance in the world of abetting legalized bribery. Both the governor and the state Legislature must get serious about campaign finance reform.
Owen goes on to explain the logic of TABOR and the spin surrounding it. Read it all.


Posted Tuesday October 18, 2005 | Catagory: (Taxes) | Permalink
0 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
Hey Wisconsin: Whose Money Is It Anyway?
by Sandi
"Whose Money Is It, Anyway? That's what Wisconsin 2nd Assembly District Representative, Frank Lasee asks in his Sept 15th Lasee’s Notes (Not yet posted as of today). He notes that last week Milwaukee passed a 76 percent garbage pickup fee increase, costing residents over $10 million more for next year for the service.

And it isn't just Milwaukee and other large cities, the "League of Wisconsin Municipalities" are lobbying your legislators. Why? To make it easier for your local governments to raise fees. From the Leauge's website under Core Principles:

Preserve Local Control. Wisconsin cities and villages have been granted extensive home rule powers to govern themselves in local matters without state interference. The League will oppose any legislation preempting or reducing municipal authority relating to spending and taxing decisions, annexation, land use regulation, employee relations, impact fees, tax incremental financing or any other matters that are primarily local in nature.

Wisconsin need a "Taxpayer Bill of Rights" (TABOR). Sure we have a property tax freeze, but it does nothing to protect against an increase in the number of fees, assessments, and other debt service loopholes at state, county and local governments. If they can't get it through property or income taxes, they find other ways to get it, increasing the financial burden on taxpayers.

TABOR does not limit spending, it limits revenue, and simply asks the government, whether state or local, to ask us, the taxpayers, via referendum when they want to take more of our money. Or in other words, instead of standing behind us reaching around with both hands in our pockets taking what they want, they have to ask us for it.

Twenty-three states have spending limits now, four have tax limits, and three have both. About half are constitutional provisions and the other half are statutory. We need TABOR now to stop the bleeding. With increases in fuel costs, don't expect the government to trim unnecessary expenditures, streamline departments or tighten their belts as we have to. They just turn to their cash cow, the taxpayer.

You can find out what legislators have signed Wisconsin's Taxpayer Bill of Rights here, and contact your representatives here.


Posted Saturday September 17, 2005 | Catagory: (Taxes) | Permalink
0 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
Good Economic News
by Sandi

This is vindication of the 2001 tax relief.

Government revenues for April 2005 were 29 percent higher than they were a year ago. As a result, the Department of Treasury will be paying down $42 billion in debt in the April-June quarter.

The good news was compounded with the news that 274,000 jobs were added in April, reducing the unemployment level from 5.5 percent a year ago to 5.2 percent. These Department of Labor statistics showed stronger-than-expected employment growth.
Posted Thursday May 19, 2005 | Catagory: (Taxes) | Permalink
0 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
Can We Fight Off Pay-Per-Mile Tax?
by Sandi

Report via the Palm Springs Desert Sun


For now we can but it's going to get tougher in the future. Fuel efficient vehicles were already catching on before the lastest pump price surges, not to mention hybrid electric-gas and alternate fuel cars. As efficency rises less is collected in federal and state gas taxes, which are used for transportation and infrastructure improvements. To make matters worse the ever rising cost of gasoline is causing people to conserve their driving.

The savings because of fuel efficiency and driving hybrid vehicles is great for comsumers, but is causing a shortfall for federal and state tax coffers that will only continue to grow over the years. Also the gas tax is a flat fee, so when the price at the pump goes up the gas tax stays flat at the same rate (except in New York which charges a percentage).

Politicians are not fond of addressing this problem but are biginning to talk more about it as highway and transportation deficits grows.

But the idea now being contemplated by Congress - and being test marketed in Oregon - is too Orwellian for our comfort.

It's nowhere near a done deal. But it's under serious consideration.

Here's the nuts and bolts of the plan: Your car mileage would be tracked via a global positioning satellite from an onboard computer in your car. If that in itself isn't creepy enough, the eye in the sky can also tell when you cross state lines. Yet another privacy invasion - justified, of course, because each state will have its own mileage fee. The fees are calculated - the state and federal governments getting their fair shares - and the driver makes periodic payments.

Nothing could be more of a disincentive. Tax-per-mile can only discourage fuel efficiency. People will drive less and be willing to pay a little more their abandoned SUVs, and drive them less. Driving them less will in turn increase the shortfall causing lawmakers to again increase the per-mile tax.

With a tax set for an average milage, everyone will not pay the same tax. For instance if you drive a Honda civic with milage around 35-36 miles per gallon you will pay a lot more tax than by the gallon. Dust off and drive the old SUV and you will pay a lot less tax than you did per gallon.

Notice in the title it says Pay-Per-Mile Tax and no mention of gasoline, and it was intentional. Undoubtedly to begin with hybrid and alternate fuel vehicles will given a large break if not an exemption. Do you really think it will stay that way once the plan gets fully implemented? They may leave a small break in place, but politicians are not known to leave any rocks un-squeezed for a possible drop of tax blood.
Posted Monday May 16, 2005 | Catagory: (Taxes) | Permalink
1 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
Wisconsin TABOR to be Reintroduced Today
by Sandi

Report via the Janesville Gazette

Today state Rep. Frank Lasee, R-Bellevue, plans to reintroduce his constitution amendment known as TABOR (TAxpayers Bill Of Rights). The amendment would severely limit government spending.

Constitutional amendments must pass in the legislature for two consecutive sessions and a statewide referendum before it can become part of the constitution.

They tried to pass it late last summer, but couldn't muster enough support in the Senate. Lasee said that he has simplified the language and is getting good vibes from Republican leadership this time.

Governor Doyle and Democrats, have denounced the plan in the past, calling it a political gimmick that could hurt funding for vital local services.

More than likely though Doyle is more worried about funding his own spending sprees. For example his budget proposal earlier this year which includes $2.2 billion in new spending, $800 million in transfers from special-purpose funds, $368 million in tax and fee hikes, and a whopping $1 billion in increased borrowing. Besides emegerency spending can be authorized under the amendment by a two thirds vote.

The TABOR amendment would:

-Limit municipalities' spending growth to the three-year average of inflation plus the percentage growth in their property value due to new construction. The limits could be exceeded by referendum.

-Limit state government, school districts and technical college districts' spending growth according to inflation, just as municipalities, plus growth in the state population or student body.

-Create a state reserve fund to help weather tough economic times.

-Allow the Legislature to authorize emergency spending with a two-thirds vote.

TABOR is badly needed in Wisconsin, especially with out of control property taxes and spending. Write your state Senators and Representaives and ask them to get behind the amendment.
Posted Friday April 15, 2005 | Catagory: (Taxes) | Permalink
0 Comments | 0 Trackbacks
Scott Walker on Taxes
by Sandi

Scott Walker Republican for Wisconsin governor has started a blog. Scott has comments turned on, but unfortunately he doesn't have permalinks. If you scroll down a bit you will see a post titled "Polyester and Wool," in which he talks about the tax problem in this state.

Taxes are too high in this state because we spend too much. The statewide property tax increase was over 6% for 2005 and Jim Doyle's answer is to spend $850 million more in the state budget. We have to hold the line on spending to hold the line on taxes.

Why is it that for most governmental budgets, bureaucrats and politicians make their wish list and then they come to the taxpayers to cover the bill? In business and in our homes, we figure out how much we have to work with first and then we build a budget based on what we can afford. Too often, government acts like we live on a $150,000 salary when we can only afford things on a $50,000 salary.

Watch for details on our tax ideas Thursday

-Scott

Scott Walker just got my vote. I'm looking forward to reading more of his posts, and hope he soon gets permalinks set on his posts.
Posted Thursday April 14, 2005 | Catagory: (Taxes) | Permalink
0 Comments | 0 Trackbacks