Academy-Award winning actress Marlee Matlin admits to People mag that she owes $50,000 to the IRS and isn’t at all embarrassed by this fact. ”I’m paying it back. I’m not shying away from it and I’m certainly not ashamed of it,” Matlin told the magazine. “It doesn’t mean I’m a bad person. It’s reality. It’s the reality that a lot of people in America are facing.” You tell ’em, girl!
The Celebrity Apprentice “star” (we use that term loosely, not being a huge fan of D-lister reality shows featuring hot messes such as Gary Busey and Lil’ Jon) tells People celebrity isn’t all it’s cracked up to be and, in fact, it’s her four kids and modest middle class life in the ‘burbs that is to blame. “Living modestly in a suburban neighborhood while trying to support four children through private school is not extravagant or living large,” Matlin said. “My husband is a Los Angeles area police officer and between the two of us we have always made ends meet in the past — and we will in this circumstance as well.”
To adjust to their new life as (probably accidental) tax protesters, the Matlin clan plans to make some important financial adjustments, like putting their poor children into public school. “At the end of the day, it’s about the best interests of the children,” she said. “Transitioning out of a private school environment will certainly relieve some of the financial pressures but hopefully this will not compromise the kids.”
Yes, hopefully it will not. Let the record reflect AG is a product of public school and we all know how horribly I turned out; someone pray for those kids.
Despite these hardships, Matlin seems upbeat and not at all worried about what this means for her reputation (let’s hope the IRS didn’t put her in the non-TIGTA-friendly “Tax Terrorist” category). “I’m not broke. Like everybody else, I owe money. My family is healthy and happy.”
Good question, you say? If you mosey around the web for a nanosecond, you’re likely to run into an article that is debating whether or not the 43rd President’s tax cuts from 2001 and 2003 should be continued. Since Nancy Pelosi is determined to get a vote on this pre-election day, the political rhetoric on this issue is flowing like a river of sewage you dare not dream of.
To help you make sense of it all, we perused some of the tax wonkiest corners of the web to bring you some perspective. And of course, some less bright observations.
• The Tax Foundation has a breakdown of how the expiration of the tax cuts would affect “Average Middle-Income Family, by State and Congressional District.” It’s simple to find your state/district to see the effect that the expiration of the cuts would have on you.
• Over at the Journal, Washington Wire presents the biggest winners and losers from the tax cuts being extended:
Among the states that would save the most from extending the tax cuts, according to a draft of the study: Alaska ($1,959 per family); Connecticut ($1,903); Maryland ($1,756); Massachusetts ($1,831); New Jersey ($1,860) and Utah ($1,779). The lowest savings for middle-income families would be in D.C. ($1,237); West Virginia ($1,316); and Mississippi ($1,355).
• Apparently Alan Greenspan still has a shred of credibility left because he weighed in a couple of weeks ago, telling Bloomberg, “I should say they should follow the law and let them lapse.”
• The Beard doesn’t agree with his predecessor, telling the House Financial Services Committee, “In the short term I would believe that we ought to maintain a reasonable degree of fiscal support, stimulus for the economy. There are many ways to do that. This is one way.”
• William G. Gale, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and co-director of the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, wrote in the Washington Post about five myths around the tax cuts, including their affect on small businesses:
One of the most common objections to letting the cuts expire for those in the highest tax brackets is that it would hurt small businesses. As Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) recently put it, allowing the cuts to lapse would amount to “a job-killing tax hike on small business during tough economic times.”
This claim is misleading. If, as proposed, the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire for the highest earners, the vast majority of small businesses will be unaffected. Less than 2 percent of tax returns reporting small-business income are filed by taxpayers in the top two income brackets — individuals earning more than about $170,000 a year and families earning more than about $210,000 a year.
• Derek Thompson is a little more pragmatic than most, arguing that President Obama should extend them for a year in order to buy some time to work on comprehensive tax reform:
The president should extend the Bush tax cuts — yes, the whole dang thing — for a year to temporarily silence his critics. Then he should use 2011 to knock it down and build a tax system that’s right for the next decade. Working off a bipartisan plan, real tax reform would simplify the income brackets and eliminate the multitude of deductions and exemptions that distort the economy with bad incentives and leave hundreds of billions of dollars on the ground.
• Fred Thompson (no relation that we know of) is using his camera moxie to voice his support for the extension of the cuts:
The cuts for the rich are likely to be extended for at least two years. The cuts for the middle class are sure to be extended for even longer than that. Total cost to the deficit over the next 10 years? More than $3 trillion, and maybe more than $4 trillion.
But according to a Pew poll, the American public isn’t as sure about this as the politicians are. A slight plurality — 31 percent — want all the tax cuts repealed. Thirty percent want the cuts for the rich extended. In other words, opinion is divided.
• And even though she needed crib notes, Sarah Palin managed to tell Fox News’ Chris Wallace that letting the cuts expire ‘idiotic’:
“[Obama’s] commitment to let previous tax cuts expire are going to lead to even fewer job opportunities for Americans,” Palin said. “It’s idiotic to think about increasing taxes at a time like this.”
“My palm isn’t large enough to have written all my notes down on what this tax increase, what it will result in,” Palin continued.
Host Chris Wallace noticed that Palin did indeed have something written on her palm. “Can I ask you, what do you have written on your hand?” he asked.
“$3.8 trillion in the next 10 years,” Palin responded, “so I didn’t say $3.7 trillion and then get dinged by the liberals saying I didn’t know what I was talking about.”
But who would ever get the idea that Sarah Palin didn’t know what she was talking about?
We’re guessing that the IRS has been struggling for years to figure out how to relate better to the general public. They finally came to the conclusion that people like videos and audio as opposed to instruction booklets that make the New York Times look like a kaleidoscope. Clearly progress has been made, however, we still foresee challenges.
The biggest problem we have is that the videos are pretty much the live-action equivalent to the instruction booklets. More, after the jump
Example:
Sorry we had to put you through that. Now our suggestions:
• Hugh Jackman or Megan Fox-types cast in the videos.
• A little song and dance, possibly performed by NPH.
• If a song and dance isn’t feasible, inject a little comedic relief. We’re thinking strategically inserted movie clips.
• Did we mention Hugh Jackman and Megan Fox?
As with anything in our society, celebrities (especially attractive ones) make everything better. Remember the Hollywood Vote Campaign videos? This is the model we would suggest the IRS strongly consider.
We’re fairly certain that Leonardo DiCaprio explaining how to avoid tax scams using his steely gaze will have a much greater affect on taxpayers than our friend here in the yellow blazer. Just a thought. If you’ve got other suggestions for the service on how to make their videos more watchable, discuss in the comments. IRS Spotlights Recovery Credits on YouTube and iTunes [Web CPA]
Before you go!
Are you Looking for a fresh accounting career opportunity?
Going Concern now has thousands of open accounting jobs.
Academy-Award winning actress Marlee Matlin admits to People mag that she owes $50,000 to the IRS and isn’t at all embarrassed by this fact. ”I’m paying it back. I’m not shying away from it and I’m certainly not ashamed of it,” Matlin told the magazine. “It doesn’t mean I’m a bad person. It’s reality. It’s the reality that a lot of people in America are facing.” You tell ’em, girl!
Good question, you say? If you mosey around the web for a nanosecond, you’re likely to run into an article that is debating whether or not the 43rd President’s tax cuts from 2001 and 2003 should be continued. Since 