PDA

View Full Version : Obama to end charitables contributions.


Chris F
04-03-2009, 02:28 AM
Obama's 'war against churches and charities'

Jim Brown - OneNewsNow - 4/2/2009 6:40:00 AM

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich says President Obama's plan to raise taxes on upper-income earners is designed to create bigger government and a more secular America.

Author and political commentator Newt Gingrich of American Solutions calls President Obama's tax program a "war against churches and charities." Gingrich accuses President Obama of "deliberately" trying to take away the charitable deduction for successful people so they will not give as much money to churches or charities.

"I think there's a clear to desire to replace the church with a bureaucracy, and to replace people's right to worship together with a government-dominated system," he contends.

The former House Speaker says the Obama administration is talking seriously about taking away the right of conscience in terms of performing abortions.

"This is most aggressive, militant, secular program I can remember," Gingrich admits. "And I think you have to be really clearly aware that they want an America which is radically different than the country which was created by those pioneers who first landed back in 1607 at Cape Henry and erected a cross to thank God for having allowed them to cross the Atlantic Ocean."

Gingrich believes people often forget that the first act of the first successful American colony was to "erect a cross at Cape Henry, to thank God for their survival and their salvation, and then to go up to Jamestown to found the colony."

bradwright
04-03-2009, 02:49 AM
Obama's 'war against churches and charities'

Jim Brown - OneNewsNow - 4/2/2009 6:40:00 AM

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich says President Obama's plan to raise taxes on upper-income earners is designed to create bigger government and a more secular America.

Author and political commentator Newt Gingrich of American Solutions calls President Obama's tax program a "war against churches and charities." Gingrich accuses President Obama of "deliberately" trying to take away the charitable deduction for successful people so they will not give as much money to churches or charities.

"I think there's a clear to desire to replace the church with a bureaucracy, and to replace people's right to worship together with a government-dominated system," he contends.

The former House Speaker says the Obama administration is talking seriously about taking away the right of conscience in terms of performing abortions.

"This is most aggressive, militant, secular program I can remember," Gingrich admits. "And I think you have to be really clearly aware that they want an America which is radically different than the country which was created by those pioneers who first landed back in 1607 at Cape Henry and erected a cross to thank God for having allowed them to cross the Atlantic Ocean."

Gingrich believes people often forget that the first act of the first successful American colony was to "erect a cross at Cape Henry, to thank God for their survival and their salvation, and then to go up to Jamestown to found the colony."
if people need a tax deduction in order to give to charity then i'm not sure they are doing it for the right reasons,
this shouldn't make much difference,at least it wouldn't to me.

Chris F
04-03-2009, 02:55 AM
if people need a tax deduction in order to give to charity then i'm not sure they are doing it for the right reasons,
this shouldn't make much difference,at least it wouldn't to me.

The point is this is a foot in the door to take more. I persoanlly never count my deducation for the same reason you mentioned. However where does it stop? He has an agenda sure enough.

rockdawg21
04-03-2009, 03:53 AM
It will definitely discourage large donations made my big business, that's for sure. You'll see charities in decline. However, this may be what Obama's had planned all along.

NateR
04-03-2009, 04:03 AM
However, this may be what Obama's had planned all along.

I think it will play into the whole class warfare thing. He knows that charitable donations will drop significantly and they're going to spin it to make the rich out to be villains who only give to get tax breaks.

We're already seeing a drop in charitable giving. The Salvation Army is in seriously trouble and has had to cut back a lot. They're even closing down the women's shelter here in Hillsboro because they just don't have the money to fund it anymore.

NateR
04-03-2009, 04:12 AM
if people need a tax deduction in order to give to charity then i'm not sure they are doing it for the right reasons,
this shouldn't make much difference,at least it wouldn't to me.

Well, $100 given for the wrong reasons spends just like $100 given for the right reasons. :rolleyes:

bradwright
04-03-2009, 04:18 AM
Well, $100 given for the wrong reasons spends just like $100 given for the right reasons. :rolleyes:
i think you missed my point.

Bonnie
04-03-2009, 04:21 AM
Well, $100 given for the wrong reasons spends just like $100 given for the right reasons. :rolleyes:

Good point! You are so logical! :laugh:

NateR
04-03-2009, 04:31 AM
Good point! You are so logical! :laugh:

Our pastor always says, "The problem with 'tainted money' is that there taint enough of it." :laugh:

KENTUCKYREDBONE
04-03-2009, 05:26 AM
Our pastor always says, "The problem with 'tainted money' is that there taint enough of it." :laugh:

And that I agree with! On a side note making Charitable giving tax deductible can allow some folks to give a bit more than other wise. Or at least it can help with the large donations! Just like what happened to Rush years ago. He started raising money for some Children's charity but the left had a fit. They hated him so bad that they demanded the Charity cut all ties with him. Somehow I don't think sick kids care about where your politics are!

Moose
04-03-2009, 03:25 PM
Our pastor always says, "The problem with 'tainted money' is that there taint enough of it." :laugh:


I hope none of my money has ever touched a taint.

Llamafighter
04-03-2009, 03:26 PM
Our pastor always says, "The problem with 'tainted money' is that there taint enough of it." :laugh:
You're pastor said "taint" ? :laugh:

Llamafighter
04-03-2009, 03:34 PM
I think it will play into the whole class warfare thing. He knows that charitable donations will drop significantly and they're going to spin it to make the rich out to be villains who only give to get tax breaks.

We're already seeing a drop in charitable giving. The Salvation Army is in seriously trouble and has had to cut back a lot. They're even closing down the women's shelter here in Hillsboro because they just don't have the money to fund it anymore.

Then all that's left is the finishing touches on his weather making machine!!!
Class warefare? really? I don't buy that.

I agree that this will affect charities donations, but in all honesty no one is feeling much like giving in these economic times. IMO

NateR
04-03-2009, 03:37 PM
Class warefare? really? I don't buy that.

Obviously you weren't paying attention during the whole AIG scandal.

Llamafighter
04-03-2009, 03:43 PM
Obviously you weren't paying attention during the whole AIG scandal.

How so, if it's so obvious? I followed it pretty closely, I thought.

Moose
04-03-2009, 03:47 PM
I'm for class warfare. We, as the middle and working class, should stop fighting rich men's wars. Let's do it. :punch:

Crisco
04-03-2009, 03:55 PM
I'd like to be on rich side of the war... They will definately have better equipment.

Llamafighter
04-03-2009, 03:57 PM
I'd like to be on rich side of the war... They will definately have better equipment.

But we'll have all the active and retired military so it won't matter.

Moose
04-03-2009, 03:58 PM
I'd like to be on rich side of the war... They will definately have better equipment.

You would.

Anyway:

Yes, but only 8 to 9% of the population. Now I'm sure there are millions of turncoats that would blindly follow our lemming leaders and titans of industry to the very death, however.

NateR
04-03-2009, 04:19 PM
I'm for class warfare. We, as the middle and working class, should stop fighting rich men's wars. Let's do it. :punch:

Predictable brainwashed liberal response. I would hope that the average American is too intelligent to fall for this stupidity, but unfortunately 52% of them have already proven that they are not.

VCURamFan
04-03-2009, 04:20 PM
Predictable brainwashed liberal response. I would hope that the average American is too intelligent to fall for this stupidity, but unfortunately 52% of them have already proven that they are not.Yeah, but think of it this way, Nate: The remaining 48% of us are going to be better equiped & we already know we'll be able to out-think them, plus we'll have the vast majority of the military, so I like our chances!!!

NateR
04-03-2009, 04:21 PM
Now I'm sure there are millions of turncoats that would blindly follow our lemming leaders and titans of industry to the very death, however.

The only turncoats in the discussion are the ones calling for class warfare. You're betraying EVERYTHING that this nation was founded upon.

NateR
04-03-2009, 04:23 PM
How so, if it's so obvious? I followed it pretty closely, I thought.

The Democrats, specifically Chris Dodd, wrote the provision that allowed for the AIG bonuses into the bailout bill. Then when the public outcry started, their rhetoric changed and they feigned outrage and passed an unconstitutional bill to tax the bonuses in order to cover up their own bungling.

Neezar
04-03-2009, 04:47 PM
I'm for class warfare. We, as the middle and working class, should stop fighting rich men's wars. Let's do it. :punch:

Without the rich men there is no middle and working class.

Moose
04-03-2009, 04:52 PM
The only turncoats in the discussion are the ones calling for class warfare. You're betraying EVERYTHING that this nation was founded upon.

Besides that stuff Thomas Jefferson believed in. Sorry to excuse myself, I have a wedding to go to. I'll be back in 3 days to continue this discussion.

Crisco
04-03-2009, 04:57 PM
I just don't understand why people who didn't go to med school for 7 years, didn't score highly on all the government tests and didn't try hard in high school feel that they should make anywhere near what a doctor does...

Most Rich people exist because they did something for it.

This country has started encouraging people to do poorly because they then recieve all the government rewards.


My parents worked to bring us from lower to middle and we got there. I know plenty of families that are afraid to make more money because they will lose certain government "bonuses".

Llamafighter
04-03-2009, 05:06 PM
The Democrats, specifically Chris Dodd, wrote the provision that allowed for the AIG bonuses into the bailout bill. Then when the public outcry started, their rhetoric changed and they feigned outrage and passed an unconstitutional bill to tax the bonuses in order to cover up their own bungling.

I didn't realize the provisions were written into the bailout. Can I find it on the document or was it that AIG included it in their total and it was not itemized specifically?

NateR
04-03-2009, 05:27 PM
Besides that stuff Thomas Jefferson believed in. Sorry to excuse myself, I have a wedding to go to. I'll be back in 3 days to continue this discussion.

You mean this?

A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government.

Or this?

I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.

Maybe this?

The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.

Or how about these?

Never spend your money before you have earned it.

My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.

That government is best which governs the least, because its people discipline themselves.

I own that I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive.

It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself.

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.

If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.

It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world.

Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves are its only safe depositories.

Do not bite at the bait of pleasure, till you know there is no hook beneath it.

Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.

For a people who are free, and who mean to remain so, a well-organized and armed militia is their best security.

A Bill of Rights is what the people are entitled to against every government, and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inference.

A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.

All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.

As our enemies have found we can reason like men, so now let us show them we can fight like men also.

Commerce with all nations, alliance with none, should be our motto

Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition.

I have no fear that the result of our experiment will be that men may be trusted to govern themselves without a master.

I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them but to inform their discretion.

History, in general, only informs us of what bad government is.

It is our duty still to endeavor to avoid war; but if it shall actually take place, no matter by whom brought on, we must defend ourselves. If our house be on fire, without inquiring whether it was fired from within or without, we must try to extinguish it.

Leave no authority existing not responsible to the people.

Liberty is to the collective body, what health is to every individual body. Without health no pleasure can be tasted by man; without liberty, no happiness can be enjoyed by society.

No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.

No man will ever carry out of the Presidency the reputation which carried him into it.

Nothing is unchangeable but the inherent and unalienable rights of man.

Our country is now taking so steady a course as to show by what road it will pass to destruction, to wit: by consolidation of power first, and then corruption, its necessary consequence.

Our greatest happiness does not depend on the condition of life in which chance has placed us, but is always the result of a good conscience, good health, occupation, and freedom in all just pursuits.

Peace and abstinence from European interferences are our objects, and so will continue while the present order of things in America remain uninterrupted.

Power is not alluring to pure minds.

Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.

So confident am I in the intentions, as well as wisdom, of the government, that I shall always be satisfied that what is not done, either cannot, or ought not to be done.

Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the form of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question.

The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time.

The moment a person forms a theory, his imagination sees in every object only the traits which favor that theory.

The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.

The republican is the only form of government which is not eternally at open or secret war with the rights of mankind.

The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive.

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty.

To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

We are not to expect to be translated from despotism to liberty in a featherbed.

We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

We may consider each generation as a distinct nation, with a right, by the will of its majority, to bind themselves, but none to bind the succeeding generation, more than the inhabitants of another country.

Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.

When a man assumes a public trust he should consider himself a public property.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe.

When you reach the end of your rope, tie a knot in it and hang on.

Whenever a man has cast a longing eye on offices, a rottenness begins in his conduct.

Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government.

Where the press is free and every man able to read, all is safe.

He who knows best knows how little he knows.

Maybe Obama should have read this one when trying to pass the stimulus package:
Delay is preferable to error.

Llamafighter
04-03-2009, 05:31 PM
You're nothing if not thorough, my friend. :)

NateR
04-03-2009, 05:52 PM
You're nothing if not thorough, my friend. :)

:laugh:

This one doesn't really apply, but it made me laugh so I included it:
When you reach the end of your rope, tie a knot in it and hang on.

I could just see that being used for some poster featuring kittens or something.:)

Llamafighter
04-03-2009, 05:58 PM
:laugh:

This one doesn't really apply, but it made me laugh so I included it:


I could just see that being used for some poster featuring kittens or something.:)

:laugh:
like this?
http://ammaryasir.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/14639.jpg

VCURamFan
04-03-2009, 06:48 PM
You mean this?



Or this?



Maybe this?



Or how about these?















































































































Maybe Obama should have read this one when trying to pass the stimulus package:Wow...every single one of those is sig-worthy! I can't decide!!!:scared0011:

NateR
04-04-2009, 04:08 AM
I think this one speaks best against Obama using taxpayer money to fund abortions:

To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

VCURamFan
04-04-2009, 04:11 AM
I think this one speaks best against Obama using taxpayer money to fund abortions:Now that is sig-worthy.:cool:

Tyburn
04-05-2009, 05:24 PM
if people need a tax deduction in order to give to charity then i'm not sure they are doing it for the right reasons,
this shouldn't make much difference,at least it wouldn't to me.
I was just going to say.

if this be the case...then Obama is launching war on supermarkets to...surely without the tax deduction, people will be less likely to spend so much at the supermarket

The accident that this grinch guy has made is showing where his priorities lie. If your priority is to giving to the church then you will sacrifice other things. If he is correct is says more about the citizenry of America then Obama :ninja:

Tyburn
04-05-2009, 05:29 PM
I think it will play into the whole class warfare thing. He knows that charitable donations will drop significantly and they're going to spin it to make the rich out to be villains who only give to get tax breaks.

We're already seeing a drop in charitable giving. The Salvation Army is in seriously trouble and has had to cut back a lot. They're even closing down the women's shelter here in Hillsboro because they just don't have the money to fund it anymore.
Ask yourself how it is in a country hit worse then any other western country in terms of financial hardship

how in two days the readers of a single national newspaper were able to give 77 Thousand in stirling to help some Soldier go to Normandy

AGAIN, this is a test of priorities...IF charities and the church giving is going down...dont blame Obama...blame the citizens who havent got their priorities right. IF Anything Barack has uncovered a problem with the citizens of America...that they are not willing to give when they dont get tax breaks...im sorry but you shouldnt just be giving what you might legitamately owe the state...to a church once in a while. SHAME on those who have not got their giving as a priority. Dont blame Obama because he's showing your nation to be greedy and not able to give without him giving you the money to do so!! tut, tut! :angry:

Tyburn
04-05-2009, 05:31 PM
Well, $100 given for the wrong reasons spends just like $100 given for the right reasons. :rolleyes:
Really?

Who did Jesus favour more...the rich man who put billions in the pot...or the hard up widow who put a smaller amount in the pot with the right attitude :huh:

Dont kid yourself Nathan...its the heart with which you give...not the materialism you give :ninja:

Tyburn
04-05-2009, 05:34 PM
Predictable brainwashed liberal response. I would hope that the average American is too intelligent to fall for this stupidity, but unfortunately 52% of them have already proven that they are not.
The avarage american ellected Barack Obama

and the average Rupublican doesnt seem to be learning from the mistaken assumptions he made last time

They were stupid...guess what Nathan...en mass...they still are :laugh:

Tyburn
04-05-2009, 05:41 PM
You mean this?



Or this?



Maybe this?



Or how about these?















































































































Maybe Obama should have read this one when trying to pass the stimulus package:
Well if Americans had spent only money they had...the whole world wouldnt be in the mess it is now. Sorry...but thats the truth. Greedy, credit loving Americans, who didnt have half the money they borrowed or used are the cause of a world wide recession.

Your President failed to tell you that not only YOUR happiness...but MINE aswell depended on you holding some of those things in high regard. Forget Barack Obama for a moment, and tell me how many of the Greedy Americans you have spoken to.

I know you rally against the Liberals...but I've never seen you actually address the people...the citizens...who committed the crime. You have no problem blaming the banks, or the Government...but what of your own people. Whats to stop them doing it again? living beyond their means again?

This isnt about the government or the banks...its about educating a lot of greedy people...and I'm not talking about the ones who live off the State, on benefits...I'm talking about those with Credit Cards :ninja:

Neezar
04-05-2009, 08:05 PM
This isnt about the government or the banks...its about educating a lot of greedy people...and I'm not talking about the ones who live off the State, on benefits...I'm talking about those with Credit Cards :ninja:

You act like greedy people don't know any better. :laugh: You can educate them all you want but that doesn't mean they won't still be greedy.


Lunacy.

Neezar
04-05-2009, 08:11 PM
Ask yourself how it is in a country hit worse then any other western country in terms of financial hardship

how in two days the readers of a single national newspaper were able to give 77 Thousand in stirling to help some Soldier go to Normandy

AGAIN, this is a test of priorities...IF charities and the church giving is going down...dont blame Obama...blame the citizens who havent got their priorities right. IF Anything Barack has uncovered a problem with the citizens of America...that they are not willing to give when they dont get tax breaks...im sorry but you shouldnt just be giving what you might legitamately owe the state...to a church once in a while. SHAME on those who have not got their giving as a priority. Dont blame Obama because he's showing your nation to be greedy and not able to give without him giving you the money to do so!! tut, tut! :angry:

No. Before if you had an honorable intention and gave to charity then the government rewarded you with a tax break. NOW the government says they don't care even if you do the right thing, you are still paying them their cut.

:wink:

AND...let's say you were going to give $10,000 to a charity. You could give the lump sum and move on. Now, you have to only give & $7,000 to charity and save the other $3,000* to pay taxes on it. So technically the government is now taking monies from the charities instead of giving. So Obama is not showing our nation to be greedy but our government.


*The taxes on charity money is probaly more than 30%. I just used that as an example.

NateR
04-05-2009, 08:17 PM
You act like greedy people don't know any better. :laugh: You can educate them all you want but that doesn't mean they won't still be greedy.


Lunacy.

Exactly.

I actually do agree with Dave on the credit card issue. In fact, the whole credit market is really just a modern form of slavery. Especially when people don't seem to know what their limits are. For those people who can handle credit responsibly, then there isn't a problem. However, those people who abuse credit and then just live the rest of their lives only being able to pay the minimum monthly payments, those people are essentially slaves to the banks and credit card companies.

I've stated this before, Dave just has a short memory. :Whistle:

However, when you combine this with raising taxes for ALL Americans (the "cap and trade" energy bill will be the biggest tax increase in American history and it will affect EVERYONE, not just those Obama defines as "rich"), then people are going to be so burdened with new taxes that they simply won't be able to give.

Finally, I highly doubt this will affect the tithing habits of loyal Christians. GOD has proven to many of us that, when we can't afford to give but give anyway, that's when GOD blesses our lives the most.

So, I don't believe this is going to shut down churches in America. However, it will severely hurt the secular charities like the Red Cross, Goodwill, etc.

Tyburn
04-05-2009, 09:02 PM
You act like greedy people don't know any better. :laugh: You can educate them all you want but that doesn't mean they won't still be greedy.


Lunacy.
I think Greedy people have a lot of persuasion from banks and credit cards, and a lot of temptation presented to them. I think they lack the self control to avoid the latter and decline the former.

Are you saying Greedy people cant be educated into living within their needs :huh:

Tyburn
04-05-2009, 09:02 PM
.

I've stated this before, Dave just has a short memory. :Whistle:
.
:laugh: more like Selective :laugh:

Tyburn
04-05-2009, 09:05 PM
No. Before if you had an honorable intention and gave to charity then the government rewarded you with a tax break. NOW the government says they don't care even if you do the right thing, you are still paying them their cut.

:wink:

AND...let's say you were going to give $10,000 to a charity. You could give the lump sum and move on. Now, you have to only give & $7,000 to charity and save the other $3,000* to pay taxes on it. So technically the government is now taking monies from the charities instead of giving. So Obama is not showing our nation to be greedy but our government.


*The taxes on charity money is probaly more than 30%. I just used that as an example.
:blink: he gave you tax breaks IF you gave money to charity...specifically...:huh:

Neezar
04-05-2009, 11:33 PM
Ask yourself how it is in a country hit worse then any other western country in terms of financial hardship

how in two days the readers of a single national newspaper were able to give 77 Thousand in stirling to help some Soldier go to Normandy

AGAIN, this is a test of priorities...IF charities and the church giving is going down...dont blame Obama...blame the citizens who havent got their priorities right. IF Anything Barack has uncovered a problem with the citizens of America...that they are not willing to give when they dont get tax breaks...im sorry but you shouldnt just be giving what you might legitamately owe the state...to a church once in a while. SHAME on those who have not got their giving as a priority. Dont blame Obama because he's showing your nation to be greedy and not able to give without him giving you the money to do so!! tut, tut! :angry:

:previous:


:blink: he gave you tax breaks IF you gave money to charity...specifically...:huh:

:rolleyes:

Tyburn
04-06-2009, 12:14 AM
:previous:




:rolleyes:
No...I thought it was a case of when he gives you a tax break...for whatever reason...that you give the money you would have given to him, if not for the break...to a Charity.

I didnt realize he was giving you a tax break AFTER you give other monies to charity as a reward.

I've never heard of a Government that rewards its people for giving...I assumed you just gave what you saved when a tax cut came along :ashamed:

NateR
04-06-2009, 12:23 AM
No...I thought it was a case of when he gives you a tax break...for whatever reason...that you give the money you would have given to him, if not for the break...to a Charity.

I didnt realize he was giving you a tax break AFTER you give other monies to charity as a reward.

I've never heard of a Government that rewards its people for giving...I assumed you just gave what you saved when a tax cut came along :ashamed:

No, if you donate $100 a month to a charity (religious or secular), then that would add up to $1200 over the course of the year. Meaning that, when they add up your wages at the end of the year and determine how much tax you owe on those wages, they will subtract $1200 from the taxes that you owe. So, if you owed $3000 in taxes that year, then you would only owe $1800. Hence, a "tax deduction."

Tyburn
04-06-2009, 12:53 AM
No, if you donate $100 a month to a charity (religious or secular), then that would add up to $1200 over the course of the year. Meaning that, when they add up your wages at the end of the year and determine how much tax you owe on those wages, they will subtract $1200 from the taxes that you owe. So, if you owed $3000 in taxes that year, then you would only owe $1800. Hence, a "tax deduction."
:huh: seriously :huh:

I've never heard anything like it before in my entire life.