Tax Question

[lupehernandezdepedajack]

Why is it when your kids reach 16 and when they really start costing you money do you lose the child tax credit?

 

[connieb]

Why is it when your kids reach 16 and when they really start costing you money do you lose the child tax credit?

Because you should be sending them out to work to pay their own way by then.

 

[fairsheet]

Why is it when your kids reach 16 and when they really start costing you money do you lose the child tax credit?

Post your whine to "Uncle Sugar", ya weenie-whining, "entitled" ingrate! You already get the dependent exemption, why are we taxpayers expected to give you this additional guvmint handout, at any age?

 

[lupehernandezdepedajack]

Post your whine to "Uncle Sugar", ya weenie-whining, "entitled" ingrate! You already get the dependent exemption, why are we taxpayers expected to give you this additional guvmint handout, at any age?

I assume the answer to my question is that you are clueless

 

[fairsheet]

I assume the answer to my question is that you are clueless

You assume correctly.

And, I assume from your response that you're oblivious as to the irony in your question.

 

[lupehernandezdepedajack]

Because you should be sending them out to work to pay their own way by then.

Actually all my kids over 18 are out of the house on their own and working the middle one is actually paying her own apartment and her way through college at the same time she is a junior working 40 hrs a week and takes between 30-36 semester hours per year.I help but she is mostly doing it herself. But it is between 16-18 when they cost you the most and it is the same time you lose the tax credit. I was just curious how and why the age of 16 was arrived at.Its obvious the guy that posted below is of no help.

 

[connieb]

Why is it when your kids reach 16 and when they really start costing you money do you lose the child tax credit?

Lupe,

You should actually get it through age 16. You don't get it in the year they turn 17. If you are doing your taxes yourself, make sure you plugged in the birthdates right.

 

[connieb]

Actually all my kids over 18 are out of the house on their own and working the middle one is actually paying her own apartment and her way through college at the same time she is a junior working 40 hrs a week and takes between 30-36 semester hours per year.I help but she is mostly doing it herself. But it is between 16-18 is when they cost you the most and it is the same time you lose the tax credit. I was just curious how and why the age of 16 was arrived at.Its obvious the guy that posted below is of no help.

I don't think there is any rhyme or reason to it. Other than seriously thinking that maybe they have summer or afterschool jobs and maybe are pitching in for some o their own spending money. I was surprised when it came out that it did not go through age 18.

 

[lupehernandezdepedajack]

I don't think there is any rhyme or reason to it. Other than seriously thinking that maybe they have summer or afterschool jobs and maybe are pitching in for some o their own spending money. I was surprised when it came out that it did not go through age 18.

That sounds reasonable both of my older kids worked part time starting the junior years in high school they had darn good part time work starting at 9 bucks an hour and incremental raises to 11 bucks an hour when they graduated high school and yes they did start buying more of their own stuff at that time

 

[lupehernandezdepedajack]

Lupe,

You should actually get it through age 16. You don't get it in the year they turn 17. If you are doing your taxes yourself, make sure you plugged in the birthdates right.

None of my kids are in that slot anymore but when I did my taxes I was curious about that my younger girl is 21 and earns way too much for me to even claim her as a dependent but she takes care of herself now anyway

 

[NightSwimmer]

Why is it when your kids reach 16 and when they really start costing you money do you lose the child tax credit?

I honestly don't know, but I suspect that this age was chosen in order to limit the expense to the federal government in lost tax revenue below a certain predetermined target threshold.

 

[Renee]

Actually all my kids over 18 are out of the house on their own and working the middle one is actually paying her own apartment and her way through college at the same time she is a junior working 40 hrs a week and takes between 30-36 semester hours per year.I help but she is mostly doing it herself. But it is between 16-18 when they cost you the most and it is the same time you lose the tax credit. I was just curious how and why the age of 16 was arrived at.Its obvious the guy that posted below is of no help.

Wow working 40 hours and taking 18 credits...she must be a genius.

 

[fairsheet]

I don't think there is any rhyme or reason to it. Other than seriously thinking that maybe they have summer or afterschool jobs and maybe are pitching in for some o their own spending money. I was surprised when it came out that it did not go through age 18.

There IS an obvious rhyme and reason to it. Name me any other welfare program that has no upper limit. Once you figure out that you can't, you'll have your answer.

 

[connieb]

There IS an obvious rhyme and reason to it. Name me any other welfare program that has no upper limit. Once you figure out that you can't, you'll have your answer.

First of all, I do not think a credit which allows you to keep more of your own money is a welfare program. (Although in some cases this is can be a refundable credit) Secondly, while all credits,deductions/phase -outs, etc have limits, floors and ceilings, there does not always seem to be a particular reason anyone one floor or ceiling was picked for any given credit or deduction. And/or that there may have been a reason when the item was introduced, but adjustments may have been made to it over the years, which make the reason beyond it completely unrecognizable. Additionally, the ability to take this particular credit doesn't follow any of other logic of who is still a "child" and what deduction or exemption you can take. And, it also doesn't follow the generally accepted age of majority. Therefore, there does not seem to be any particularly rhyme or reason why 16 is the last year that you can take this deduction when for the majority of families they still have kids at home and in school through age 18.

Of course it has to have an end limit. But, why 16 versus 15 or 18 was picked has not been explained by the legislators who wrote the credit and does not follow any of the other usual age limits and cut offs already in the tax code.

If you know specifically why they picked the age of 16 as the last year that a parent was entitled to this credit, by all means, please share.

connie

 

[NightSwimmer]

First of all, I do not think a credit which allows you to keep more of your own money is a welfare program.

That is illogical. If you have been "allowed to keep" money that you already owed in taxes, then you have been extended a welfare benefit just as surely as if you received any other form of government assistance. The child tax credit is most definitely a social safety net program intended to assist low income people. You can't claim it if you have a high enough income. Your "your own money" phrase is meaningless nonsense in this case. One should always expect to pay their taxes with their own money.

 

[connieb]

That is illogical. If you have been "allowed to keep" money that you already owed in taxes, then you have been extended a welfare benefit just as surely as if you received any other form of government assistance. The child tax credit is most definitely a social safety net program intended to assist low income people. You can't claim it if you have a high enough income. Your "your own money" phrase is meaningless nonsense in this case. One should always expect to pay their taxes with their own money.

The Government choosing to reduce the amount of taxes it confiscates from me is not a welfare program. It gave me nothing. It only took less. Most child tax credits are non refundable, which means - you can't do anything other than reduce your income tax liability down to -0-. In some special circumstances, it does reduce your liability beyond -0- in which case it is a welfare program.

 

[NightSwimmer]

The Government choosing to reduce the amount of taxes it confiscates from me is not a welfare program. It gave me nothing. It only took less. Most child tax credits are non refundable, which means - you can't do anything other than reduce your income tax liability down to -0-. In some special circumstances, it does reduce your liability beyond -0- in which case it is a welfare program.

You have a very strange sense of community. Someone must have been very mean to you.

BTW: This particular one is refundable, if I'm not mistaken.

 

[connieb]

You have a very strange sense of community. Someone must have been very mean to you.

BTW: This particular one is refundable, if I'm not mistaken.

Partly yes, and partly no. There is an entire formula that needs to be used to determine it. Also, the term non-refundable is a little bit confusing. Most people get a refund, but they still owe some taxes - so they have a tax liability but their refund is from their withholding in excess of their liability. When they speak of a refundable credit, it is that you can have a -0- income tax liability and still get the credit - thus giving you a credit of money you didn't even owe. In that case, yes, it is welfare much like the EIC. That is not how it works for everyone who gets this credit though.

I do not think having a sense of community has anything to do with a person's approval of the confiscatory nature of taxes. I have no problem contributing to the services such as police, fire, roads and education that we all benefit from. But, I would by far rather pay an annual subscription fee for each service, than pay into a general fund to be misused and abused by politicians.

 

[NightSwimmer]

Partly yes, and partly no. There is an entire formula that needs to be used to determine it. Also, the term non-refundable is a little bit confusing. Most people get a refund, but they still owe some taxes - so they have a tax liability but their refund is from their withholding in excess of their liability. When they speak of a refundable credit, it is that you can have a -0- income tax liability and still get the credit - thus giving you a credit of money you didn't even owe. In that case, yes, it is welfare much like the EIC. That is not how it works for everyone who gets this credit though.

I do not think having a sense of community has anything to do with a person's approval of the confiscatory nature of taxes. I have no problem contributing to the services such as police, fire, roads and education that we all benefit from. But, I would by far rather pay an annual subscription fee for each service, than pay into a general fund to be misused and abused by politicians.

You don't have that option as a United States citizen, and you likely never will.

 

[NightSwimmer]

Additional Child Tax Credit - If the amount of your Child Tax Credit is greater than the amount of income tax you owe, you may be able to claim the Additional Child Tax Credit.