Chocura750

It is interesting to see how the views of the religious right are involved in the new tax bill. Look for other provisions based on moral principles.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

Why do you think alimony should be deductible?

Tell me why you want to subsidize the divorced, and convince me why I should want to..

Larry the Legend Loc: Not hiding in Milton

Show me where it says that. This don't pass the 'sniff' test.

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

It is under the old bill but will not be in the new.. The recipients of the money has to declare it as income and is taxed...

Alimony should have never been a deduction in my opinion.. Now it will not be...

pafret Loc: Northeast

Alimony should be the taxable income of the person who receives it, not the one who pays it. It is unjust to tax the earner for moneys, which he didn't have, usually by fiat of a court, which is an arm of the government. Similarly, the government at all levels taxes your income and to force you to pay taxes on taxes is totally unjust. It isn't your income and never was.

While the marriage existed, there were special tax provision allowances for maintaining a family unit because of the benefits derived by the State from such unions. Divorce ends those allowances.

When the bond is dissolved provisions have to be made for the offspring of such unions. Given our division of labors in society, the female spouse is given the care of the young in most cases. She is usually unable to earn sufficient income on her own to survive or live in comfort. This is changing and the divorce rate seems to be keeping pace with the change. However, that is another topic.

Given that the concept of alimony is justified then the State should recognize that the individual who earns the money and pays the alimony does not have the use of that money any more than he or she has the use of taxes on his income. The moneys paid in alimony should be taxed as income by the person receiving it.

As far as why you should want to "subsidize" it, why would you want to pay any taxes? No matter what they are used for, there is some segment of the populace which objects to that use. I object that our war machine takes up more than fifty percent of our tax revenues and we outspend the next six nations combined. I object that our elected public servants live like Pashas, at the public expense, in addition to generous salaries. I object that necessary expenditures such as cost of fuel and vehicles to go to work are classified as commuter expenses for W2 wage earners, but the same expenses are deductible by businesses. There is no difference in this function; in both cases the expenditure is necessary to derive the taxable income.

You can pick out any particular insanity and ask why you should subsidize it but the only answer is that you don’t make the rules and whoever did wanted it that way. Suck it up or find a deserted island to live on where you make your own rules. Be careful not to let anyone else on the island because thy will immediately find fault with your rules.

Chocura750

I would be willing to guess that the amount of the tax saving to the payor of the alimony given by his/her the deducting of the alimony payment is small to modest. What bugs me is the hypocritical Republicans searching around for anything to raise tax revenue take away a little thing that makes to lives of some people easier.

Larry the Legend Loc: Not hiding in Milton

Don't like alimony? Don't marry, and have children with, someone who is incompatible. How hard is that?

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

Dumpkins.... All tax cuts makes someone's like easier. All loopholes make someone's like easier.

Why do you think the loophole for alimony income should exist?

Chocura750

Fundamental fairness.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

How is it fundamentally fair for poor married people to subsidize rich divorcees?

You didn't think very much about this before you posted, did you?

Larry the Legend Loc: Not hiding in Milton

Is there an 'issue' with that? What if it's actually 'amoral' but you're just looking for confirmation bias? Maybe you should take a step back and survey the 'bigger picture' and see what patterns emerge. And if it emerges that it really is based on a moral judgement then be grateful, it could just as well have been motivated by evil intentions...

Think about it.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

Apparently he's upset that rape and murder are illegal because of morality.

Larry the Legend Loc: Not hiding in Milton

I know I'm wasting the effort but sometimes I just can't help myself. When I see something so obviously r****ded I have to single it out and go after the perpetrator. You might say it's in my DNA, so to speak.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

This one seems to make a lot of complaint posts without first understanding the subject.

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

The complaint or b***hing is more important..