Clinton Caregiver Credit: Max value of $1,200?

[Skwmom]

Last edited Sun Nov 22, 2015, 05:03 PM - Edit history (3)

This says max value of $1,200 on up to 6,000 in caregiver costs so if true it looks like a credit of 20% on up to 6,000. Plus you would need to know if it was refundable or non-refundable.

If this is true, the Time's article was misleading. How shocking that would be.


CLINTON, Iowa (Reuters) - Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton will on Sunday propose a tax credit offsetting up to $6,000 in costs associated with caring for elderly and disabled family members, and allowing caregivers to accrue Social Security retirement benefits for such work.

The caregiving credit, which would have a maximum value of $1,200 for qualifying families, will be the latest in a “range of tax cuts aimed a boosting the take-home pay for middle-class families” that Clinton will announce over the coming weeks, according to a campaign aide.

http://news.yahoo.com/clinton-propose-6-000-tax-credit-caregiving-costs-170434323.html

Note: Many tax credits are not $1 for $1. You spend a $1, you get a $1 of tax credit.

For example, the American Opportunity Tax Credit:

The amount of the credit is 100 percent of the first $2,000 of qualified education expenses you paid for each eligible student and 25 percent of the next $2,000 of qualified education expenses you paid for that student. But, if the credit pays your tax down to zero, you can have 40 percent of the remaining amount of the credit (up to $1,000) refunded to you.

So only $4,000 in qualified educational expenses (as defined by the IRS) can be used to calculate the AO credit, 100% for the first 2,000, 25% for the next 2,000 (and only 1,000 is refundable). Based on the article I read it seemed like 20% of up to $6,000 in qualified care giving expenses (as defined by the IRS) would be used to calculate the credit. Plus would any portion of it be refundable?

In regards to the UP TO 5k for families and 2.5 K healthcare credit you first have to deduct 5% of your income (probably AGI). Plus is it refundable or non refundable? It it dollar for dollar?

But hey, it makes great headlines. Tax promises have been used for years to make the working class feel like they were getting something. However, it's generally been the Republicans who play these games.


https://www.irs.gov/Individuals/AOTC

[Duckhunter935]

1. Sounds like it is only worth 1200

More funky math to pander. Single payer would make this unnecessary

[99th_Monkey]

3. Exactly!! It's a 30-pieces-of-silver sop .. as I've pointed out on another thread on this subject.

This "feel good" credit will no doubt be the rough equivalent of 30 pieces of silver

Offering a pittance, appealing to individual self-interest, rather than appealing to an ethic of
"being in this together". It's not a horrible idea by any means, but it's tokenism imho.
Probably "good politics" and will help some people who could use it.

By contrast Bernie is looking at leveling the whole playing field, starting by making the top 5-6%
pay WAY more in taxes, like they used to under Presidents Rosevelt, Isenhouwer and Kennedy;
and closing the gaping tax loop-holes of giant corporations, taxing Wall St. transactions, etc.

And along with this ^ he proposes a very modest increase on some upper-middle-income folks,
people who can actually AFFORD such an increase, and which will still directly benefit these same
folks -- along with lower income folks -- with free higher education, free health care, and a $15
minimum wage.

Offering these piecemeal tax credits is mere tokenism to pander to people's "me first" instincts,
and to distract from Bernie's wholistic "we're all in this together" approach to tax reform.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=838313

[Skwmom]

10. Using tax promises to fool people is an old trick. n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

4. How does single payer offset the costs of caregiving?

There are about 12 million people in the United States who need long-term care and that number is expected to grow to 27 million by 2050 as the population ages. Clinton’s campaign estimates that the economic value of the unpaid work provided by family caregivers of the aging and disabled was $470 billion in 2013.

http://news.yahoo.com/clinton-propose-6-000-tax-credit-caregiving-costs-170434323.html

[artislife]

29. Nurses who come to the home.

I cannot believe you are asking this question.

It will cost, it just won't cost the family. I am staying with a client (organizing client) because she broke her leg and is in a wheel chair. She couldn't use crutches because she had a mastectomy that took a lot of the chest muscles. Her daughter lives over an hour away, has a 5 year old and 18 month old. They are going to buy me a used car. They needed me, knew I needed to get a new car and we get along well. So I am up in the morning getting her out of bed and make breakfast. I do the shopping, errands and cook dinner. I make sure she gets in and out of the shower safely and leave the bedroom door open to hear her if she needs anything. Do you know how much that would cost? I have been here since Oct 20 and will be here until Dec 20th. She is trying to transition onto a walker now. It is hard for her physically, she is 68 years old. They know I have turned away pet sits to do this and may have lost a long term reoccurring one because of it. But she means a lot to me.

I just wonder if I will ever have a me if something were to happen to me? We need single payer.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

32. I am asking the question because I was a caregiver for twelve years.

I am asking the question because I was a caregiver for twelve years. Medicare did indeed send a nurse when her doctor ordered it.However Medicare doesn't pay for custodial care and that's the primary source of care that caregivers such as myself provided that wasn't compensated. When my mom became a below the knee amputee at the age of seventy eight she needed assistance in bathing, eating, and getting dressed, as well as twenty four hour supervision. That's the primary care caregivers are giving that is not compensated.


I was fortunate. I was healthy and strong...I know elderly men and women who have health problems of their own who are caring for elderly spouses. That has to be exceptionally hard on a person.

[artislife]

47. Yes.

You understand how little it is, then.

[Crystalite]

55. In home care is so costly, Clinton's plan is a drop in the bucket.

So small as to be worthless, and to me it's yet another sign of a person utterly out of touch with the reality of what the little people experience.

In home care, at a discount, runs over $3,000/month at a minimum.

[artislife]

56. It is one more way the wealth of the middle and lower classes will be taken. nt

[JDPriestly]

72. What would a tax credit of $1200 have done for you?

That's only $100 per year. If you were a full-time caregiver, you probably didn't have any income in the first place and may not have declared any taxes to begin with.

Medicare sent a nurse.

How much did you spend as a caregiver?

The OP says that the $100 per month is to be given on expenditures of $6,000 per year or $500 per month. Did you have out-of-pocket expenses of $500 a month to declare in order to qualify for the full $100 per month?

Lots of people on who stay home to take care of a parent have very little income out of which to pay $6,000 per year in expenses.

I think this proposal will have very limited use and very limited value to Americans.

It sounds and looks like it solves a problem but doesn't even begin to do much.

Typical Hillary.

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

53. Who says nurses will come to the home?

Just because it's done in some countries, doesn't mean it will be done here.

Single payer doesn't mean the government will pay and pay for whatever we want. We will have set benefits just as insurance, but hopefully we won't have ridiculous deductibles.

[Le Taz Hot]

64. There are temp agencies who specialize in this.

However, it is VERY expensive ($50.00 an hour and up) and they require a minimum of 4 hours so $200.00 a day just isn't possible for most people, That $1200 tax credit us used up in less than two weeks if they're coming 5 days a week.

[MaggieD]

63. This is about non-skilled caregivers, not nursing

In the real world it is referred to as "personal care" and it's not covered by insurance. Again, the misinformation here never ceases to amaze.

Nurses do not perform the duties you describe. Ever.

[artislife]

65. I know it is.

But in a civilized country, the relief to family memebers by the government would have certified help coming to care for the loved one for an amount of time.

I have clients who pay for CNAs to come and help them. Out of pocket.

I realize we live in a country that doesn't give a care for those who are weak or infirmed.


You seem perfectly fine with it, however.

[MaggieD]

66. Get real

Now you want the government to provide free personal care too? Unbelievable. Where does the money for all this unending free stuff come from?

[artislife]

69. Your tone comes off rudely to me.

This is not the first time. But bye

[MaggieD]

70. That's exactly how I feel about the non-stop specious attacks on Dems

Bye to you too.

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

67. England is "civilized," and the government has a very

tight budget for caregivers. BBC radio was covering this just a couple of weeks ago.

[Hestia]

79. I had RN's come to the house when I got out of the hospital, very long story I don't want to get

into, but the law here is LPN's but the doctor ordered RN's, which I am so glad for because I had to go back into the hospital due to only something RN's "caught".

I just depends on what your insurance and/or Medicare will pay for, or the difference you are willing to pay for.

[hootinholler]

15. It's only worth 1200 if you spend 6000 or more. n/t

[jwirr]

74. And as I tried to point out in my case - the cost of care will

not consider the wages the care giver lost while staying home.

[hootinholler]

80. It assumes that everyone can afford to hire a caregiver

Absolutely there is nothing to help anyone who is working 2 jobs in this proposal.

[jwirr]

81. That is what I was thinking. I and others like me are not

even considered in this proposal by Hillary. Women indeed.

[99th_Monkey]

2. Very confusing, probably deliberately

how exactly is "offsetting up to $6,000 in costs" ... equal to "a maximum
value of $1,200 for qualifying families"?

What am I missing here? .. except that the $6000 figure certainly reads well in the
headlines to low-information voters.

[upaloopa]

6. You are missing understanding how income tax works.

You offset costs at the same rate as your marginal income tax rate. If you pay 15% tax on income you offset expense at 15% also.

[Skwmom]

18. Misunderstanding? How about clarifying what in the heck you are talking about.n/t

[pangaia]

34. :>)))

[99Forever]

39. No shit.

Good luck with that. I expect more word salad.


Heapin helpins.

[JonLeibowitz]

36. You are a describing a tax deduction, not a tax credit. Words matter. This is a confusing proposal.

[99th_Monkey]

43. It's mostly higher income people who benefit from tax deductions. Sounds about right

for the candidate of, by and for the 1%

[JonLeibowitz]

50. Well, since most people are not higher income, it is mostly lower income people who benefit

However, you are right in what I think you mean, that they receive a disproportionate benefit because of their marginal rates being higher.

[kristopher]

44. Check the difference between a tax deduction and a tax credit.

http://www.irs.com/articles/tax-credits-vs-tax-deductions

[karynnj]

17. It is confusing as a tax credit is usually something subtracted from the taxes due

If it worth only $1200, this is more like a tax deduction where the amount is subtracted from the taxable income. Many articles say the same as this one http://blog.turbotax.intuit.com/tax-deductions-and-credits-2/tax-deduction-vs-tax-credit-529/ The WP article seems to say that it could be a tax credit up to $6000 -

People caring for an elderly parent or other family member could qualify for a tax credit of up to $6,000 under a proposed change to tax laws announced Sunday by Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

The credit would help defray a caregiver’s out-of-pocket expenses, often a hidden cost of caring for an elderly relative. Clinton would also seek changes to the Social Security system to allow credit toward a wage earner’s monthly benefit at retirement when that wage earner takes time off to care for an elderly relative.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/11/22/clinton-backs-tax-credit-of-up-to-6000-to-help-those-caring-for-elderly-relatives/

[Skwmom]

20. A lot of tax credits are calculated based on a percentage of allowable costs.

For example, the American Opportunity Tax Credit.


The amount of the credit is 100 percent of the first $2,000 of qualified education expenses you paid for each eligible student and 25 percent of the next $2,000 of qualified education expenses you paid for that student. But, if the credit pays your tax down to zero, you can have 40 percent of the remaining amount of the credit (up to $1,000) refunded to you.

https://www.irs.gov/Individuals/AOTC

[karynnj]

23. That makes sense and is why the WP said it would "defray" some of their out of pocket expenses

My kids graduated years ago and I didn't look up the detail - knowing that given that they had no appreciable income and went to expensive colleges, they got $1000.

Does that mean this is being designed to be a tax credit equal to 25% of up to $6000 in out of pocket expenses?

[HerbChestnut]

5. How am I not surprised?

That's how these types of tax credits always work. Some people benefit, most don't, and the insurance companies still make a killing. It's time to scrap this awful system we have and adopt universal healthcare.

[karynnj]

19. this is not health care, but a caregiver taking care of someone who needs care

Not to mention - some tax credits are REFUNDABLE -- some not.

[pangaia]

37. A "...caregiver taking care of someone who needs care..."

is not health care?

Then what is it?. fly fishing?

[karynnj]

49. it is not covered under healthcare, but "long term" care

[jwirr]

75. Let me assure you that it is not seen that way. It is not seen

as of value to anyone other than the patient. In fact if you are the mother staying in the home to take care of the patient it is seen as your duty and of no value to anything else. Not even Social Security.

BTW - I learned this taking care of my disabled daughter for 45 years.

[madville]

7. It won't ever get through Congress while she is in office

She can propose anything with relative safety because she will be able to blame the failure to enact any of it on the Republican House and rightly so.

But it's a good gesture from a PR standpoint. The overwhelming majority of any candidate's proposals won't come to fruition by 2020 so it's mainly posturing at this point.

We know there will be a Republican House through at least 2022, plus figure that 2018 will most likely be brutal for Congressional Democrats if Hillary is President.

[Skwmom]

12. It worked for Bill. All those promises he made.... Of course she'll pass the corporate agenda

with the Republicans and the corporate media and corporate Democrats will sing her praises for demonstrating bipartisanship.

[Todays_Illusion]

8. It is one of those conservative talking point scams. a supplement to anyone caring for another

would be something of value for many, this tax credit not much of anything for not many.

[karynnj]

22. First of all - it is for out of pocket expenses, not a supplement to anyone caring for someone

However, if it is a REFUNDABLE tax credit, it would reimburse people for those out of pocket expenses even if they don't owe taxes.

The bigger help in this proposal is the idea of giving Social Security credit for people doing this without pay. That will improve their benefits when they retire.

[MeNMyVolt]

31. Thanks Karynnj.

I have a feeling you're going to have to copy and paste this reply many times in the near future.

The SS credits will help a lot of people, a large portion being women. Plus, it may help some elderly feel just a little bit less guilty about having to rely on their kids when things go south. That may help with garnering any GOP support.

[MeNMyVolt]

9. So, helping with caregiver expenses, and the SS credits is now a bad thing on this board?

This place has lost its mind.

[HerbChestnut]

13. No one's saying it's a bad thing.

It just doesn't do a whole lot in the end.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. It's only a bad thing because the Chosen One didn't advocate it.

[NurseJackie]

24. Truth.

[Skwmom]

25. You are wrong. n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

27. I am right.

I was a caregiver for twelve flipping years and the government did nothing for me...If I would have thrown my mom in a nursing home it would have cost the government over $500,000.00 for those twelves years but I wasn't going to throw my mom in a nursing home.

[Bluenorthwest]

60. Upthread you ask how single payer helps caregivers. I have a very good friend in a single payer

country who was born with complex disabilities, she uses a wheelchair and the works. She was not expected to live into adulthood but medical advances have allowed her to have a career and a life. A good year, she's in hospital for just a week or so now. In childhood she nearly lived in hospital.
Her father is a minister, so their income is moderate. Here is how much her medical care cost her parents: 0. Nothing. Not a dime. From birth until adulthood, when she became her own responsibility and she also pays this: 0. Nothing. Not one pound.
In the US, her healthcare costs would have been astronomical, her family hugely burdened, and her life probably greatly shortened.
So instead of spending everything they had, all he earned and then going bankrupt, they simply loved their child and lived and managed to thrive.

A $1,200 credit would not have fixed that floor.

I have also been an uncompensated caregiver, which is why I'd like to see others relieved of some of that pressure by society, using my tax dollars please. For you and for me, I'd even vote for retroactive applicability. But for me, I don't need that to support future bridges for others.

[pangaia]

40. No, it is not a bad thing. You are making that up.

it is not a bad thing.
But it is misleading, from what I can deduce, and also is not enough.

And just who is the Chosen One?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

41. "And just who is the Chosen One?"

Isn't it obvious?

[artislife]

46. It doesn't do much. nt

[jwirr]

77. It is not a bad thing just not going to help that many of us

who really know what staying home to take care of others really means.

[Vinca]

11. In the grand scheme of things, that's not a heck of a lot of money.

Surely she can do better than that.

[TM99]

16. So it is now about $1200.00 as maximum?

Well shit, that is about as much as SNAP for a month. That will totally make everything just fine!

[dsc]

26. maybe if you have a family the size of the duggars it is

but for any reasonable sized family that is flat out, gold carat, false.

[hedgehog]

21. $6000 or $1200, no one will turn it down, but it's not enough money.

[cantbeserious]

28. What Else Would One Expect From A Candidate That Started Life As A Republican

eom

[aspirant]

33. Complicated math

You spend 6,000 and you get back 1200 = 4800 loss, the hole is getting deeper.

How do you offset that?

Well, pay the caregiver $15/hour minimum wage
$7.25 now subtracted from $15 = $7.75 increase (round off $8) x 40/hours per week = $320/week x 52 weeks/year = $16,640 - $4800 loss = $11,740 gain

The people win and we don't have to pay corporate America mega bucks for R&D to find just the perfect way of care giving.

[TexasBushwhacker]

35. The SS credit could be more valuable than the cash

in the long run. For example, if you have to quit working for a couple of years to be a caregiver and you're close to retirement age yourself, it can affect your SS benefits for as long as you get them.

[Hoyt]

38. According to CNN, there are other aspects of Clinton's caregiver assistance.

"According to the aide, Clinton's plans will "call for providing caregivers with added Social Security benefits, and reforming work-family policies to support paid and unpaid caregivers."

The tax credit was discussed earlier in the article.

Sorry, but I'm on my phone and folks will have to look up the article if you wanna fact check.

[restorefreedom]

42. i would say this is like the aca

its a step, an improvement, but not the ultimate goal: to rid us of greedy predatory insurance companies and implement guaranteed health care for all

i would feel better about it if hillary made it clear that this a step on the path, not the final destination on this matter.

any hillary supporters got any good info on her health care ultimate wish list? i would love to see it

[elleng]

45. How's this sound?

Governor O'Malley proposes Reform Social Security to support, rather than penalize, caregiving.

Governor O'Malley proposes:

Reform Social Security to support, rather than penalize, caregiving. Governor O’Malley supports providing up to five years of “caregiver credits” that would increase the 35-year wage base for those who spend an extended period of time providing full-time care for children, elderly parents, or other dependents. In practice, current methods of calculating benefits penalize workers, most often women, who take extended time off to care for their families.

https://martinomalley.com/policy/expanding-social-security/

Hillary Clinton to Propose Tax Credit for Caregivers.

'Her Democratic rivals for the nomination, Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, are in favor of small tax increases to pay for large programs. Sanders supports a 2.2% tax increase to pay for single-payer healthcare, and O’Malley has voiced support for a Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand-sponsored paid family leave bill, which includes a 0.2% middle class tax increase.

The debate over whether to raise any taxes has become a contentious debate in the Democratic primary.'

http://time.com/4123569/hillary-clinton-caregivers-tax-credit/

Anyone heard about it?

No? WHY???

[Bluenorthwest]

62. I'm very fond of O'Malley's plan and yes, I have heard of it.

nt

[artislife]

48. What if the care giver doesn't earn an income? nt

[JonLeibowitz]

51. Since it's a deduction, not a tax credit, let alone a refundable credit, the caregiver is SOL. :-(

[artislife]

52. Yup nt

[Recursion]

54. I like O'Malley's caregiver incentive better

He proposes to count up to five years spent doing child or elder care as years worked for the purposes of Social Security and Medicare.

[99Forever]

57. Weasel politicians use weasel words to make weasel promises in weasel campaigns.

It's how they roll.

[ecstatic]

58. Isn't Bernie proposing a tax increase for everyone? Which means

Sanders supporters who are criticizing Hillary's tax credit as being too small are being somewhat hypocritical? Tax credit vs tax increase. Hmmmm.... Either way, I'm not a fan of fuzzy math, regardless of who is guilty of it.

[Crystalite]

59. No, he is not. Unless you earn over ~$120,000, you'll keep more of your earnings.

If Sander's policies are adopted, any increase in taxes paid by middle class wage earners will be far more than offset by lower healthcare and education costs, paid leave policies, etc.

[arcane1]

78. You're forgetting that there would be no more insurance premiums under single-payer

I'm sure most people's monthly premiums are greater than the small increase on taxes would be. That's certainly the case for me.

[MaggieD]

61. Meanwhile Bernie proposes NOTHING

So there is that. It apparently isn't even on his radar.

[Fearless]

68. Seriously?

[JDPriestly]

71. I was just looking at Hillary's economic proposals.

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/plan-raise-american-incomes/

Too little, too late.

She is just trying to make it look like she will do something for the middle class. She has no clue as to how tough it is for working families.

Her early childhood education support only provides child-care, that is pre-school, for four-year-olds in addition to what we have. That is the way I read it anyway. Correct me if I'm wrong.

The FIRST months and years of life are the essential ones in terms of brain formation. She doesn't offer any hope for the moms and dads who are both working or who are single parents and who don't have access to really, really good child care. I have friends who put their baby in a child-care facility in which the census,, the number of children is above the legal limit. They feel the caregivers are good so they are leaving their child there. We can do better than that. A yacht or private jet more or less for some member of the oligarchy, maybe just that one Ferrari fewer could help that family with a baby a lot. But Hillary offers no hope. No hope at all.

She is too afraid of raising taxes. She suggests raising taxes on the rich, but . . . . What is her plan for achieving that goal? Spending more money on war? "Growing" the economy? Our economy is growing. But too much of the growth goes to the richest. If Obama has not been able to raise the taxes on the rich, how is Hillary going to do it?

Bernie's plans are very clear. He is going to call on us to call on Congress to tax trades on the markets -- beginning with Wall Street.

Hillary's program to raise minimum wages -- is to all of $12 per hour??? After the inflation in the past how many years since we last raised the minimum wage?

Bernie is right. Raise the wages to $15 per hour minimum country-wide and then raise the payroll tax a tad to pay for family leave -- less than a raise of $2 per week. Give to working families, and take a tiny bit back to hand back to new parents. What goes around comes around.

And on healthcare, Bernie's plan for single payer will, in the end, save a great deal of money. Hillary is supporting Obamacare and the profiteering by her Wall Street friends from our healthcare dollars. Bernie's plan is far better. Hillary's is payback to her Wall Street donors. We can do without Hillary's paybacks.

Hillary's actual policies are laughable. They are not even the proverbial drop in the bucket for helping middle-class families. It's unbelievable.

Hillary gets a D- in my book in terms of proposing solutions for income inequality.

Her plan for supporting higher education is also just one big, cruel joke.

I asked Hillary and Bernie supporters to compare the two candidates' policy proposals on a number of issues. Bernie supporters came through. Hillary's?????? Silence.

No wonder she says she can get it done. If you don't set your "get it done" goals very high, getting it done is not so much as a challenge.

If people compare Bernie and Hillary on the issues, BERNIE WINS HANDS DOWN.

It's up to us to move Congress to enact the legislation Bernie will propose. And Bernie has a plan for that.

Hillary -- yet another do nothing candidate with a big SALES campaign for a do-nothing presidency.

We do not need yet another do-nothing president who spends all her time focusing on war and foreign policy. We need a president for Americans and America as well as for the world.

Feel the Bern!

I will not vote for Hillary under any circumstances. I will vote for every other Democrat on the ballot. But Hillary's campaign is just a big hoax. She will do nothing for the country or the world. Sorry to be so harsh. But please compare their campaign proposals. Bernie wins hands down.

If you haven't compared them, why are you going to vote?

If you vote, you should inform yourself first.

If you back a candidate, you should know what you are backing.

[jwirr]

73. Another tax credit? Okay lets take a look at this from my

experience. Extremely disabled daughter, needs 24 hour total hands on care in all aspects of her life. I did the whole 24 hours until she was 14 so I could not work any job during that time. In all I took care of her 45 years while living on welfare. Welfare never provided me with more than $.60 an hour. I never had to pay taxes. During the last part of her life she attended a day shelter for 6 hours a day. I had part time low pay jobs most of that time.

Is this $1200 refundable like earned income? Would it be counted against me on welfare as income? Is it yearly?

And I am most interested in the credit for Social Security. I was not considered working even when I am saving the system thousands of dollars a month. (She is now in a foster home who gets $3000 a month with all medical expenses paid. I did the same thing for $.60 an hour for 45 years.) So am I still under her plan going to be living in poverty When I start taking Social Security?

But like I said about O'Malley's plan - its a start.

[tazkcmo]

76. Tax Credits.

Great if you already have the money.