Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

3 Bumps

Would you be ok with a smaller payheck?

Employers in the U.S. are starting to warn their workers to prepare for slimmer paychecks if Congress fails to vote on an extension of Bush-era tax cuts.

“I’ve been doing payroll for probably close to 30 years now, and never have we seen something like this where it gets that down to the wire,” said Dennis Danilewicz, who manages payroll services for about 14,000 employees at New York University’s Langone Medical Center. “That’s what’s got a lot of people nervous. All we can do is start preparing communications with a couple of different scenarios.”

Lawmakers won’t start debating whether to extend the cuts, which expire Dec. 31, until after the Nov. 2 elections.

Answer Question
 
grlygrlz2

Asked by grlygrlz2 at 1:06 PM on Oct. 27, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

Level 39 (106,530 Credits)
Answers (42)
  • Because it takes weeks to prepare withholding schedules, the Internal Revenue Service will probably have to assume the cuts will expire and direct employers to increase payroll deductions starting Jan. 1, experts say.

    grlygrlz2

    Comment by grlygrlz2 (original poster) at 1:07 PM on Oct. 27, 2010

  • Yes, I would be. Matter of fact, I'd rather they didn't extend ANY of the tax cuts, than extend them for the ultra-rich, too. It's not like they're raising our taxes, it's just an end to some TEMPORARY cuts in the first place.
    Anouck

    Answer by Anouck at 1:08 PM on Oct. 27, 2010

  • We’re kind of stuck between a rock and a hard place,” said Ron Moser, head of human resources for the school district of Kenmore-Town of Tonawanda, New York, which pays about 1,900 teachers, custodians and aides each month. In upstate New York, where winter heating costs are among the highest in the country, many school employees earn between $20,000 and $40,000 a year, he said, and losing $50 in a paycheck is “a significant dollar amount.”

    grlygrlz2

    Comment by grlygrlz2 (original poster) at 1:08 PM on Oct. 27, 2010

  • ...If Congress fails to act, income tax rates will revert to higher levels dating from June 2001.


    For a married couple with an income of $80,000, that would drain an extra $221.48 in withholding from a semi-monthly paycheck, according to calculations by the Tax Institute at H&R Block. Married individuals earning $240,000 a year would lose an additional $557.78 to withholding in a single semi-monthly paycheck. The Tax Institute at H&R Block calculated federal tax rates for single-income earners and married taxpayers without children...

    grlygrlz2

    Comment by grlygrlz2 (original poster) at 1:10 PM on Oct. 27, 2010

  • This is a common tactic that "mid" size employers use in order to influence votes. However, HR trends support that they never really put it into effect because of turnover costs. There are other places employers can reduce the average of $50 - $100 per check.
    urkiddingright

    Answer by urkiddingright at 1:11 PM on Oct. 27, 2010

  • Its not like its the employer's fault. But when the tax hikes hit, it will be in our take home pay. Thanks Obama, this is the change he said he was gonna give us.

    Nov 2nd will be my victorious day!!! Get out and vote.
    CCMami

    Answer by CCMami at 1:11 PM on Oct. 27, 2010

  • I don't get a paycheck, but I have to think of how negatively this will effect a huge portion of middle and lower class workers that are already hanging on by just a thread.  It will be an adjustment if DH's check is smaller, but we aren't hanging on by a thread.  Yet, anyhow.

    QuinnMae

    Answer by QuinnMae at 1:12 PM on Oct. 27, 2010

  • This is a common tactic that "mid" size employers use in order to influence votes. However, HR trends support that they never really put it into effect because of turnover costs. There are other places employers can reduce the average of $50 - $100 per check.


    Did you read the article?  School District HR departments are also concerned.

    grlygrlz2

    Comment by grlygrlz2 (original poster) at 1:13 PM on Oct. 27, 2010

  • 's not like they're raising our taxes, it's just an end to some TEMPORARY cuts in the first place.


    Doesn't change the reality that if they don't vote ASAP, paychecks will be less. I bet some wish Nancy wouldn't have bailed before calling a vote...

    grlygrlz2

    Comment by grlygrlz2 (original poster) at 1:16 PM on Oct. 27, 2010

  • – collapse

    Yes, I would be. Matter of fact, I'd rather they didn't extend ANY of the tax cuts, than extend them for the ultra-rich, too.


     


    That is the dumbest thing I've ever heard a housewife say.


    Talk about cutting your nose off to spite your face.


    You are obviously a Democrat and will be chit out of luck next Wednesday morning.



    mustbeGRACE

    Answer by mustbeGRACE at 1:17 PM on Oct. 27, 2010 (hidden) + expand

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.