Text 48910, 75 rader
Skriven 2007-03-28 17:42:34 av mark lewis (1:3634/12.0)
  Kommentar till text 48901 av Roy Witt (1:397/22)
Ärende: Any or all
==================
 ml> ummm... hello? where have you been? my oldest son was born in Dec of
 ml> 1981... the tax code allowed us (i was married at that time) to claim
 ml> him for the entire year...

 RW> But the 1981 code didn't allow you to get back 'twice' what you
 RW> paid in. 

whatever it was, H&R Block got us back some $3000 IIRC and i had paid in less
then $1000...

no big deal, really... what it is is someone fussing about something they
haven't been able to take advantage of and so they're missing out and feel that
no one should get it since they can't O:)

 ml> we also got to claim earned income credit and head of household...

 RW> But you still didn't get back 'twice' what you paid in. You got a
 RW> deduction credit. You still paid taxes, but merely at a lower rate.

nope... i've _always_ gotten back what i paid in or more...

 ml> i was in the USAF, went in in Aug of that year, and my refund was
 ml> more than what i had paid in...

 RW> 'Twice'?

t'was a long time ago and i don't have the paperwork any more but it was a lot
more than paid in...

 ml>  it has been that way ever since, too... when she and i divorced, she
 ml> kept the child and was able to take advantage of those tax codes...

 RW> But you couldn't, so you've misled those who don't know how that
 RW> works by stating, 'it has been that way ever since'.

 RW> For her, but not for you.

no... because i got it also when he came and lived with me... if one provides
6months or more support, they can claim the dependent...

 ml> he came to live with be when he was 15 and that gave me the
 ml> opportunity, once again,

 RW> See?

see what? we got it (more actually since we were married) when we were
together... she got it when we split and she had custody of him... i got it
when he came to live with me... there's nothing misleading there... same
rules...

 ml> to utilize those tax codes and i did so all the way up until
 ml> he no longer qualified for me to claim him... now, if he had
 ml> continued his education by going to college while living here at
 ml> home, i'd have been able to continue to claim him and still use those
 ml> tax rules up until he turned 21...

 RW> And?

and what? after 21, i'd no longer have been able to claim him and get the
additional deductions...

 ml> now, since those tax codes have been around since at least 1981, why
 ml> don't you pick another row to hoe 'cause you've come to the end of
 ml> this particular one ;)

 RW> Hmmmm, it looks like we found more field to plow, so maybe not yet.

nope, this field and row are finished... i'm not playing your games... i'm
_telling_ what is and what is done... don't like it? change the laws... won't
do anything to/for me since i don't have any children i can claim any more
anyway...

)\/(ark

 * Origin:  (1:3634/12)