Press Releases

DOUBLE TAXATION OF SENIORS IS NEW CAUSE FOR AMAC

AMAC's Founder, Dan Weber

BOHEMIA, NY, Apr 29, 2011 – The Association of Mature American Citizens says it is focused on a new cause—the double taxation of senior citizens.  Dan Weber, AMAC’s president, says it is “appalling” that many seniors on social security must pay income tax on their benefits and is calling on Congress to address the issue promptly.

Sign up  to help  in the fight NOW!

“The government is taxing their taxes, and that is just plain unfair” Weber notes in a new campaign calling on all seniors to join AMAC in its “demand that tax reformers on the Hill take a closer look at this particular, peculiar inequity in the law that decidedly targets older Americans.”

He gives as an example a person with a combined income of $38,000, (assuming $24,000 in Social Security income) would have half of his or her Social Security taxed. That person would fall into the 15% tax bracket resulting in $1,800 in extra tax on their Social Security income. In fact, when total combined income exceeds $44,000, 85% of the individual’s Social Security gets taxed, typically resulting in an extra tax of $3,000 or more. [See Social Security publication 915 to figure your combined income].

“These folks accumulated Social Security benefits in the first place by paying taxes and now the taxes they paid are being taxed.

AMAC has designated its Web site, www.amac.us, as the rallying point for its new cause and is asking “seniors and their families to visit and express their opinions and tell their own stories on this and other issues affecting them.”

Sign up to help in the fight NOW!

Read more articles by Daniel C. Weber

Leave a Reply

84 Comments on "DOUBLE TAXATION OF SENIORS IS NEW CAUSE FOR AMAC"

Notify of

Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
slackker
1 year 5 months ago

Here is the bill to fix this below. It has been introduced.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hr589

slackker
1 year 5 months ago
Tired of Being Screwed
1 year 7 months ago
My husband has been on SS “Disability” starting at age 51 for the last 10 years making an average of $900 per month. I work and make over $32,000.00. Because we are married FILING JOINTLY, my income counts as his income! Let’s flip this idea…..my income counts as his income in double taxing his SSD, why isn’t my SS paid in used to establish his monthly SSD income at a higher amount? MY EARNINGS are UNDER MY SS# and should not be calculated as relative to his benefits. This double taxing on SS benefits is STEALING!! MY income tax return, earned under MY SS# is not my husband’s earnings! They say “file Married Separately”, well let’s see….I would pay a higher tax percentage to start off and my husband would not even file because he only has SSD to claim so HIS Standard Deduction and Exemption Allowance is unavailable to… Read more »
Arn
2 years 4 months ago

When did congress change the law on double taxation. When was it past and who voted for it?

sedwin
2 years 3 months ago

This became law under the Reagan-Greenspan Tax Law of 1983. It was part of the “Supply Side” economic plan where the rich stopped paying their fair share and the poor picked up more of the slack. Of course even this amount didn’t make up the whole amount the rich no longer stopped paying which is why we have been a society of debt and deficit since Reagan (with the exception of the Clinton years when Clinton made the rich pay their fair share for those few years). Supply-side economics is nothing but a pyramid scheme for the wealthy. If we made the rich pay their share and we removed the ceiling of roughly $200,000 on social security taxable income, we could immediately remove these illegal double taxes.

Ted
2 years 10 months ago

Just wait until our fellow conservatives move us to the (un)FAIR Tax. It sounded great about 25 years ago, but my “59 1/2 Birthday” is less than two weeks away and I am scared to death that I’ll be paying tax AGAIN on the same money, this time when I spend it in retirement. Unless there is a phased-out refundable tax credit for retired persons (phased-out fully when those never subject to Federal income, Social Security and Medicare taxes reach retirement), it should not be endorsed by this organization. I hate to say it, but I may have to talk the Republican talk and vote the Democrat vote if that’s what it will take to spend, tax-free, my already-taxed Roth IRA and non-retirement savings!!!

Lou Wilson
4 years 4 months ago

My problem is that your income is taxed before Social Security is taken out. Then the Social Security is taxed as income when you get it back. This is dual taxation. Social Security itself is not a tax, but the income used to pay it should not be taxed at the front end, if we’re also paying tax on it in the back end.

Nancy
4 years 5 months ago
It is simple….my income was taxed when I was working and now because I worked my behind off for 32 years and get my retirement benefits I am having to pay taxes on 85% of my Social Security. I am not even working now, but get a monthly retirement benefit and because of this monthly retirement benefit I have to be taxed on my Social Security that I already paid taxes on when I was working. This burns me up. I was shocked to find out I would have to pay 1500 dollars this year in taxes. I am just furious. The government has money to send and spend in other countries, but they tax the senior citizens here in the USA. The government has money to bail out all these huge cooperations that didn’t handle their money correctly etc. but they tax the senior citizens. This will really drive… Read more »
Lawrence Coop
4 years 6 months ago

The IRS formula used to determine tax owed on Social Security income has not changed since it was first introduced and contains glaring examples of marriage penalties. In 1994 the amount subject to tax was increased from 50% to 85% and since that time Social Security COLAs have amounted to 44.3% with no indexing of the IRS formula. Maybe I should feel fortunate that our total income reguires us to pay Federal tax on 85% of SS income. The added 35% subject to tax resulted in an additionl tax liability of $1082.00 for tax year 2011.

Lauralie Campbell
5 years 9 days ago
In the latest edition of Amac Advantage, an article titled “Seniors Paying Double Tax on Social Security Income” suggests two specific proposals to remedy this wrong policy. While I applaud Amac for highlighting the unfairness of US tax policies against seniors, I am disappointed in Amac’s proposed alternatives. First, Amac encourages President Obama and Congress to remedy the situation through Tax Code changes to “take this tax burden off the middle class” and “go after the multi-millionaires and billionaires”. It is disappointing to hear Amac espouse what is essentially class warfare as a solution to any government created problem. Second, the Amac suggestion to create a ‘tax on the windfall profits received by the trial lawyers when they win a major lawsuit’ is doubly flawed. It ignores the fundamental need for tort reform in our flawed civil litigation system. Most importantly, it only fuels an already insatiable federal appetite for… Read more »
Frank K
5 years 17 days ago

The tax on 50% of Social Security benefits was initiated by R Regan. It was increased to 85% by Clinton.
The problem is the basis of $25,000 for Single and $32000 for Married has not been increased for inflation sicne 1983.

Richard & Dorothy
5 years 1 month ago

Yes, the Dems did pass this law.
Yes, it is unfair.
Yes, it should be repealed.
Why would the Dems repeal a sacred cow ? (Taxes that pay for their social programs)
The time to attempt repeal is when Obama is out of office and the Senate is controled by more conservatives.
Above all, we should never advocate raising the taxes on any person, rich, lawyer or whatever for our own benefit. Sounds like an Obama non solution.

TallGal in GA
5 years 1 month ago

I paid tax on my income and then Social Security was taken out. I pay taxes on my retirement income, which includes that same Social Security money. If Obama’s debt cure includes another tax on Soc Sec, wouldn’t that be TRIPLE taxation?

edna fox
5 years 2 months ago

my dad died in 1978 of cancer. five days before he died he received a letter from s.s. admin. stating that he was “able” to work. he died and my mom fought to get his s.s. benefits to no avail. how sad is this? makes you wonder who got it.

edna fox
5 years 2 months ago

i had to pay taxes on my s.s. for 7 years because my husband was working and this put us in a higher tax bracket. he retired last year and we were told that we would not have to pay these s.s. taxes any longer. this is so unfair, the govt. wants your money any way they can get it. they should be made to pay us back,

John W. Rosenberger
5 years 2 months ago

I know all about it. I have been paying into SS ever since it started back about 1936. It’s the damned democrats that want our money. We have got to get rid of the goddamned democrats!!

Marc Arquilla
5 years 2 months ago

Thank you

Marc Arquilla
5 years 2 months ago

Good to read that many others agree.

Marc Arquilla
5 years 2 months ago
I have not joined AARP because I learned that they work against my beliefs. I agree with most all of the postings above and am sickened to learn that seniors and all American citizens are being screwed by most of our representatives. They talk a good talk about helping people, but it is they (the politicians) who get helped by their actions. I have paid into the SS system since I was 14. I have been very sick for the last ten years and continued to go to work to support my family. The more I earned, the more I was penalized (taxed). Two years ago I had a kidney transplant. The transplant has kept me alive, but I can no longer work to support my family. I qualified for S.S. Disability and Medicare at the age of 60 (because of a law that entitles kidney dialysis or transplant patients).… Read more »
Donald
5 years 2 months ago
As a recent retiree I was exposed to the Federal Senior Citizen Tax, which is an extra tax on Social Security and/or Railroad Retirement benefits. It causes your taxable income to increase by taxing up to 85% of your Social Security and/or Railroad Retirement Benefits. Before 1984, Social Security benefits were tax exempt, then after a Greenspan Commission report pointed out that Social Security finances needed bolstering, congress changed the rules so a portion of Retirement Income became taxable. The limit was on 50% of the Social Security Benefits for (married filing jointly) returns that had more than $32,000 income. The algorithm increases the taxable income which in turn increases the Federal Income Tax burden on existing SS beneficiaries. The extra money was to be designated (Earmarked) to the Social Security Trust Fund. Then in 1993 the limits was raised to 85% and the base amount was raised to $44,000.… Read more »
Joan Apodaka
5 years 2 months ago

At what point do we say enough is enough? Now they starve our seniors and continue to give to illegal interloping squatters? We have worked our butts off from Day One and were made to pay into the system. We have been suckers for decades; taxing from citizens to give to illegal invaders. The majority of whom believe that 30% of U.S. territory should be “returned” to Mexico. If we are not angry enough at this point to “walk like Egyptians” I wonder how much agony at the hand of tyranny WILL it take?

Rick 05
2 years 9 months ago

Hate to say it but you are wrong my friend. Illegals are not entitled to SS.One must have a valid SS number and work for 10 yrs. and or have 40 credits to qualify. So please get your facts straight before you rant.

wpDiscuz