COVID Economy

[GooooMarquette]

I read (I believe on CNBC‘s website) that you can adjust for an underpayment when you file your taxes.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Billy, I've heard Terry Savage talk about some of these issues on the radio like the one you have, and I think there may be a way to deal with it given you 2020 income.  Maybe take a look at her website. 

Yes. I have mentioned this before. The stimulus checks are prepaid credits on your 2020 taxes. So if your circumstances change and it impacts the credit you received you should get the difference credited on your 2020 taxes.

[Spotcheck Billy]

The tax software I used this year asks about any stimulus you received in 2020.

[Billy Hoyle]

Billy, I've heard Terry Savage talk about some of these issues on the radio like the one you have, and I think there may be a way to deal with it given you 2020 income.  Maybe take a look at her website.

Thanks, I'll check it out.

Honestly, we really don't need the additional amount to get by (it would just go towards our mortgage payment) but I know there are many others in a similar situation that do.

[MU82]

AP Report: Sitting on billions, US Catholic dioceses amassed taxpayer pandemic aid

https://apnews.com/article/small-business-public-health-health-coronavirus-pandemic-philanthropy-db3872b0e7885c324592e49f84c9b2f9?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=AP%20Morning%20Wire&utm_term=Morning%20Wire%20Subscribers

An AP investigation has found that scores of Roman Catholic dioceses in the U.S. had more than $10 billion in cash and other readily available funds when they received at least $1.5 billion from the federal government’s small business emergency relief program.

The Paycheck Protection Program was intended for employers who were badly battered by coronavirus lockdowns. Instead of suffering financially, however, many dioceses are reporting in audited financial statements that these assets ended up growing amid the economic downturn, Reese Dunklin and Michael Rezendes write in this exclusive report.

Overall, Catholic Church recipients were perhaps the paycheck program's biggest beneficiaries. Church officials say they needed government relief to pay staff because donations from the faithful slowed when churches were ordered to close.

[Jockey]

AP Report: Sitting on billions, US Catholic dioceses amassed taxpayer pandemic aid

https://apnews.com/article/small-business-public-health-health-coronavirus-pandemic-philanthropy-db3872b0e7885c324592e49f84c9b2f9?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=AP%20Morning%20Wire&utm_term=Morning%20Wire%20Subscribers

An AP investigation has found that scores of Roman Catholic dioceses in the U.S. had more than $10 billion in cash and other readily available funds when they received at least $1.5 billion from the federal government’s small business emergency relief program.

The Paycheck Protection Program was intended for employers who were badly battered by coronavirus lockdowns. Instead of suffering financially, however, many dioceses are reporting in audited financial statements that these assets ended up growing amid the economic downturn, Reese Dunklin and Michael Rezendes write in this exclusive report.

Overall, Catholic Church recipients were perhaps the paycheck program's biggest beneficiaries. Church officials say they needed government relief to pay staff because donations from the faithful slowed when churches were ordered to close.

They need the cash to defend the priests who raped little boys.

[Billy Hoyle]

They need the cash to defend the priests who raped little boys.

George Carlin once suggested we could wipe out the national debt by imposing property taxes on the Catholic Church. It's time...

[Galway Eagle]

George Carlin once suggested we could wipe out the national debt by imposing property taxes on the Catholic Church. It's time...

Impose it across the board too many  store front "churches" and mega churches and pay to get to another level churches out there

[GooooMarquette]

I would be fine with church tax exemptions going away, but it would never pass Supreme Court review. If anything, we are likely to see an expanding view of the 'religious exemption' with the current conservative court. We already have religious-themed amusement parks that are tax-exempt (The Holy Land Experience), and conservative groups have been actively trying to expand the exemption so that it would apply to political activities undertaken by churches.

I will leave it at that, except to say the Catholic Church should return this money, so that it can go to small businesses that really need it.

[jesmu84]

I don't have a problem with a group or business taking money offered to them.

The problem is that it should never have been made accessible in the first place.

[warriorchick]

I don't have a problem with a group or business taking money offered to them.

The problem is that it should never have been made accessible in the first place.

This.

Don't hate the player, hate the game. 

Do you think no one should take tax deductions that they are legally entitled to if they can afford to pay the tax?

[GooooMarquette]

I don't have a problem with a group or business taking money offered to them.

The problem is that it should never have been made accessible in the first place.

Yes, the initial availability was a problem.

But the church wants to preach (literally) moral and ethical values, so it should have been at the front of the line (in front of Shake Shack, Potbelly and Ruth's Chris) to return the money when the economic hit it expected didn't materialize.

The legislation was drafted hastily due to the urgent situation. Companies that took advantage of weaknesses in the law should step froward and do the right thing...without first having to be exposed in an AP investigation.

[GooooMarquette]

And the Rev. James Connell of Milwaukee agrees with me. From the article:

For its analysis, AP consulted experts in church finance and church law. One was the Rev. James Connell, an accountant for 15 years before joining the priesthood and becoming an administrator in the Milwaukee Archdiocese. Connell, also a canon lawyer who is now retired from his position with the archdiocese, said AP’s findings convinced him that Catholic entities did not need government aid — especially when thousands of small businesses were permanently closing.

“Was it want or need?” Connell asked. “Need must be present, not simply the want. Justice and love of neighbor must include the common good.”

[JWags85]

This.

Don't hate the player, hate the game. 

Do you think no one should take tax deductions that they are legally entitled to if they can afford to pay the tax?

You’d be surprised how many people think taking advantage of deductions and loopholes is distasteful and that paying your “appropriate” tax is an honorable civic duty

[GooooMarquette]

I didn’t say anything about a taxable organization taking advantage of deductions. We are talking about an entity that benefits enormously from  tax-exempt status and literally preaches doing the right thing to its followers. Under those circumstances and given that it is flush with cash, it seems the church should do the right thing.

This has nothing to do with taxable businesses.

[warriorchick]

You’d be surprised how many people think taking advantage of deductions and loopholes is distasteful and that paying your “appropriate” tax is an honorable civic duty

But do they actually do it?  Do they add an extra amount to the number at the bottom of their tax return and pay that?

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

And the Rev. James Connell of Milwaukee agrees with me. From the article:

For its analysis, AP consulted experts in church finance and church law. One was the Rev. James Connell, an accountant for 15 years before joining the priesthood and becoming an administrator in the Milwaukee Archdiocese. Connell, also a canon lawyer who is now retired from his position with the archdiocese, said AP’s findings convinced him that Catholic entities did not need government aid — especially when thousands of small businesses were permanently closing.

“Was it want or need?” Connell asked. “Need must be present, not simply the want. Justice and love of neighbor must include the common good.”

One of the problems that I see is that the Church wants to be a bunch of separate and poor parishes when it benefits them, but in reality they’re not.

[Hards Alumni]

This is certainly hard to police.  Some companies have been impacted more than others during the pandemic, and of course we all want money to make it to the pockets of workers who would otherwise be unemployed, but how do we determine (quickly) who needs what?  I don't love the approach that the federal government used, but I understand it.  Additionally, the second round of PPP still has money available.  I think the real shame was capping the original amount.  In the time it took for the second round of PPP to be approved, many businesses shuttered and workers were laid off.  The most important part of a fire hose approach would have been the oversight and prosecution of fraud after the money was taken. 

[pbiflyer]

But do they actually do it?  Do they add an extra amount to the number at the bottom of their tax return and pay that?

Some do. Heck, I bet even peopleyhou know.

[SERocks]

Some do. Heck, I bet even peopleyhou know.

In my 31 years of preparing tax returns, I have never seen anyone knowingly pay more than the law demanded.  I have seen tons try to pay less than the law demanded.  Anyone who uses the word loophole to indicate that someone is taking advantage of the tax system should be asked if they take the legal deductions that are afforded to them.  Loophole has a connotation that someone is doing something illegal when normally that person is just following the tax laws as written.  Now tax evasion is another matter.  No loophole there, just flat out lying.

[pbiflyer]

If you do not believe that there is grey areas and everything is black and white when it comes to tax laws, then I am glad I am not using your tax services.

People with complex tax returns may opt not to utilize some of those grey areas.

[mu_hilltopper]

Looking at charts this morning about the 1st and 2nd Stimulus checks ..

There's a constant drumbeat that "people are suffering" .. and that's true, millions are.  But the stats show that the checks .. didn't hit the mark.

Firstly, amazingly, in 2020 incomes went way up due to government checks, spending went way down.  The estimate is that there's $1.6 *trillion* in excess cash in the consumer economy ("dry powder.")

Second .. saw a breakdown of "stimulus check spent" by incomes.  Even households under $46k, only 32% of them spent the 1st stimulus check .. 21% spent the 2nd check.  I knew it was low, but that's an eye opener.   -- The highest bracket in the chart, households over $78k, spent 39% on 1st, 8% on 2nd stim check.

All the rest of the stim dollars were saved / used to pay down debt. 

So here we're debating a 3rd stim check, bigger than the other two combined.    Yes, that money will be used for millions to buy food, but for far more millions, it'll just be used to pay down debt and saved. 

That's just nuts.   It seems like the best argument is that *maybe maybe* in 9-12-18 months there will be pent up spending from stimulus checks.  That's pretty weak for $450 billion.   

I'd rather make that $100b targeted to household incomes below $50k, and $350b on just about anything else, like infrastructure. 

Or .. fine, if you want to dole out $1400 pp, phase it where the under $50k crowd gets it immediately, the others receive the money in 9 months when the economy is open and they can spend it on travel, restaurants, etc.

[warriorchick]

If you do not believe that there is grey areas and everything is black and white when it comes to tax laws, then I am glad I am not using your tax services.

People with complex tax returns may opt not to utilize some of those grey areas.

There is a big difference between tax advantages that you are clearly qualified for, and "gray areas" in which you aren't 100% sure, but you cross your fingers and hope The IRS agrees with you if you get audited. Some people don't mind taking an aggressive position; others wouldn't want the potential hassle or risk.

If you really aren't taking certain tax breaks because you truly believe that you aren't paying enough tax, wouldn't you be better off taking the deduction and giving that money to a well-run charitable welfare organization? If you give it to the government, they might spend it on something evil like farm subsidies or the military. 

[Galway Eagle]

Looking at charts this morning about the 1st and 2nd Stimulus checks ..

There's a constant drumbeat that "people are suffering" .. and that's true, millions are.  But the stats show that the checks .. didn't hit the mark.

Firstly, amazingly, in 2020 incomes went way up due to government checks, spending went way down.  The estimate is that there's $1.6 *trillion* in excess cash in the consumer economy ("dry powder.")

Second .. saw a breakdown of "stimulus check spent" by incomes.  Even households under $46k, only 32% of them spent the 1st stimulus check .. 21% spent the 2nd check.  I knew it was low, but that's an eye opener.   -- The highest bracket in the chart, households over $78k, spent 39% on 1st, 8% on 2nd stim check.

All the rest of the stim dollars were saved / used to pay down debt. 

So here we're debating a 3rd stim check, bigger than the other two combined.    Yes, that money will be used for millions to buy food, but for far more millions, it'll just be used to pay down debt and saved. 

That's just nuts.   It seems like the best argument is that *maybe maybe* in 9-12-18 months there will be pent up spending from stimulus checks.  That's pretty weak for $450 billion.   

I'd rather make that $100b targeted to household incomes below $50k, and $350b on just about anything else, like infrastructure. 

Or .. fine, if you want to dole out $1400 pp, phase it where the under $50k crowd gets it immediately, the others receive the money in 9 months when the economy is open and they can spend it on travel, restaurants, etc.

I think the phased check is a great idea. Currently outside of takeout, home improvement and buying GameStop stock there's not much you can do with the checks so of course they're not going to help much. But you're right the moment things are open again, let's say late summer or fall, a payout would be massive to get everyone going out to dinner, movies, concert, ball game, trip etc. and really get spending.

It also might help speed up the return to normal and get people more psychologically ready to return to normal.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Continuing the enhanced unemployment would be much better for the economy.  Or even finding a way to restore some lost income even if they aren't unemployed.

However it isn't as politically feasible.