Spy Car Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Gosh, I don't know....my mother always told me if you can't say something nice..................... I could tell him I like the name Thaddeus :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalanamak Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 How about a tax deduction for moles with hairs? You have to mention the moles without hairs, on a different line, but no credit. They just want to keep track of how many moles you have that could potentially have hairs in the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Debbie in OR Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 (edited) But it's a deduction and not a credit so then it really wouldn't yield much. You'd still have to spend the $ on the expenses & then you apply for a deduction which would presumably lower your taxes payable but not by a huge amount.....I can't see someone getting a pet, spending 3500 on vet care, just so they can claim it & save a couple hundred on their taxes. It also specifically says that the purchase price for an animal doesn't count. & if it was people trying to make a quick buck off this I'm guessing they'd be buying a mill or petstore animal, not going through rescue. I'm one of those rescue types too; I think a good rescue will have sufficient screening to prevent most deadbeat owners. Hmmm...deduction is better. (I couldn't get the link to work and am in the middle of a move so didn't take the time to research.) I'm not really sure how I feel about it so I'll leave it at that now and go pack more boxes and drink more coffee Edited October 20, 2009 by Debbie in OR deleted thoughts...not enough coffee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kim in Appalachia Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 we should have a flat tax. Deductions become ways to buy votes or push agendas. A flat tax would eliminate that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oak Knoll Mom Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Couldn't someone make the same argument about a child? I agree with you, I just can see how someone might argue that a deduction for a pet isn't vastly different than that for a child. I don't think you can make the same argument about a child. A child will hopefully grow up to be a productive, tax-paying member of society. A pet won't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibraryLover Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 I don't think you can make the same argument about a child. A child will hopefully grow up to be a productive, tax-paying member of society. A pet won't. What if it's a service pet, or part of a canine unit? :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jujsky Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 I think it's sort of silly -- at least the amount of $$$$ they're suggesting/pet. I can see a small write-off each year though. This would impact me in a positive way though. I have 3 cats & 2 dogs. The dogs are getting older and their vet bills are getting higher because of it. I would take care of them either way though. I made the commitment of taking care of them for their entire lives when we made the decision to bring them into our home and make them part of our family. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AuntieM Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Ludicrous. As someone previously mentioned, pet ownership is optional. I fear it would lead to a bunch of claimed-then-abandoned animals. And what arm of the government will be charged with enforcement, door-knocking for "pet checks"? I could only see it if it were an official assistance animal, but my guess is that's already covered elsewhere in the messy tax code. Just another one of many good intentions that are addressed with no thought to the true ramifications. I wish they'd get serious about passing some real deductions, like tax credits for home schoolers who purchase all their own curriculum while continuing to pay in to the public school tax base. Then again, I guess it's really safer if they keep ignoring us... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AuntieM Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 What if it's a service pet, or part of a canine unit? :D I imagine as part of a canine unit, a law enforcement agency has a budgetary expense set aside for this, just as they would for any other sort of equipment used in their operations. Certainly there's already some provision for service animals, wouldn't you think? Anyone know for sure? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tricia Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 This is way out there. Nothing however to be surprised about with Obama. But, if you want to know what I think. I think I am going to get myself a few pets!! Just kidding. I have enough in the form of children. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angela in ohio Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 And there it goes, folks... ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AuntieM Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 And there it goes, folks... ;) Sigh, same thought just crossed my mind. :glare: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hornblower Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Nothing however to be surprised about with Obama. Good grief. Hello??? This is sponsored by a Republican rep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angela in ohio Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Sigh, same thought just crossed my mind. :glare: Can we just lock the thread ourselves or do we need a Moderator? :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AuntieM Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Can we just lock the thread ourselves or do we need a Moderator? :D :lol::lol::lol: That would be convenient, but if you think tags are abused.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5Youngs Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Since they have no real issues to ponder :glare:, of COURSE they should be spending time making up foolish bills like this one. If they are truly this bored, can I suggest they look at ways to make the current tax code more user friendly?! Just what we need, more pages to add to the never-ending tax rules already on the books............... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audrey Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Assuming this is true.... I'm a little torn. My first reaction was WHAT?!? But think about it, for many people their pets are like their children. We get tax breaks for our children. Why not a pet? But basically I still think it is ridiculous. I think if you can't afford a pet, don't have one. I also think if you can't afford children, don't have them either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dayle in Guatemala Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Good grief. Hello??? This is sponsored by a Republican rep. This is true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumping In Puddles Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 (edited) This is way out there. Nothing however to be surprised about with Obama. But, if you want to know what I think. I think I am going to get myself a few pets!! Just kidding. I have enough in the form of children. :rolleyes: Oops, I guess you didn't realize that the bill was introduced by Michigan Republican Mr. McCotter (Chairman, House Republican Policy Committee) Edited October 20, 2009 by Jumping In Puddles Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marylou Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Albert Mohler is talking about our friends the animals on his radio program today. Very interesting! www.albertmohler.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephanieZ Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 but I would like to hear what people think of the proposed amendment to the internal revenue code to offer a tax credit of up to $3500 for owning a pet. Do you support it or not, and why. I'm just curious as to where most people stand on the issue. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3501: DH and I own 5 dogs, 4 cats, and a vet practice. We agree that this is the stupidest idea we've heard in a very long time. And, we hear a lot of stupid ideas. I mean, come on, people! Idiocy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vida Winter Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 I only read a the first page of responses but my initial impression is that this is a ridiculous idea. The potential for fraud and abuse is enormous, and even if everyone followed the rules to a tee I wouldn't want to subsidize everyone else's pet. My pets = my expense. I like it that way. I want less government, not more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.