Mexico wants to dictate US Immigration Policy

I think we're on the same page here with wanting to see the best resolution to all those seeking a better life for themselves and their families by coming to this country, no matter what their status. I share your frustrations in many areas of this complex situation and I'm in no way "anti-immigration".

But the facts of the matter are that most Hispanic immigrants (legal or not) do not pay taxes. Just because taxes are withheld doesn't mean they are taxes paid.

Most of the Hispanic immigrants in this country are very low wage earners and I know that you are aware that the US has a progressive income tax that applies very low tax rates to low income households. Millions of households pay no federal tax at all. When you factor in that those illegals that do file a return do so to receive a refund (using both illegally obtained SS numbers and ITINs) and that the vast majority erroneously receive the Earned Income Credit, the IRS is probably actually losing revenue.

The same would apply even if all 10 to 15 million illegals were suddenly to become legal. The US would see little to no increase in tax revenues.

0 Replies

I can't speak for other companies, JW, but everyone where I work has Social Security deductions. Everyone. And the total SS and federal income taxes are EFTPS filed on a bi-weekly schedule. I'm not speculating. I'm the one doing it. On the income tax, it is not for me to question marital status and number of exemptions.

Now, a certain number have SS numbers which do not verify. Through some really quirky rules, they are still there. I've detailed the conflicts on other threads. I follow the rules, and the taxes are paid. By the way, you would have to be in some really rarified atmosphere to consider them underpaid - though you would not want to do the work, to say nothing of working the hours.

0 Replies

Cool! Another reason to get rid of the "progressive" income tax and go with a flat tax. You work here, you pay the man like everyone else. Gotta love it. Thanks JW.

0 Replies

JustWonders wrote:

Just because taxes are withheld doesn't mean they are taxes paid.

Can you explain this? When the IRS takes my money, I consider that I am paying taxes-- whether I ask for some of it back or not.

Quote:

Millions of households pay no federal tax at all. When you factor in that those illegals that do file a return do so to receive a refund (using both illegally obtained SS numbers and ITINs) and that the vast majority erroneously receive the Earned Income Credit, the IRS is probably actually losing revenue.

I am pretty sure (based on people I know) that those with ITINs can not get the Earned Income Credit. The people that I know, don't.

If you get a refund, it is your money that is being refunded. If you get a refund on a illegally obtained SS number, you are still only being refunded money that you put into said SS number.

I am quite sure the IRS is not losing revenue from people paying taxes. I would like to see if you have any information that would back up this claim.

Quote:

The same would apply even if all 10 to 15 million illegals were suddenly to become legal. The US would see little to no increase in tax revenues.

In the short term you may be right (although you may be wrong even in the short term).

In the long term you are adding young, motivated workers. If these workers have access to education and can participate in the economy above board, there is no question that this will increase tax revenue.

Economists will tell you that especially with the baby boomer retirement, the US needs more residents of working age. The Social Security system is already propped up by immigrants including undocumented ones.

It is interesting to see the split in the Republican party between the business community and those who want a White Christian America. The business community isn't often allied with the left.

But then, they more than anyone understand the need for workers.

0 Replies

I have noticed the argument that we need more workers so I went to a government site that gives unemployment figures. The first number I encontered was a percentage (4.9%). Dosent look too bad. But then I looked deeper into the site and found that translated into a figure of 3,486,000 people looking for work. This dosent seem like a labor shortage to me.

0 Replies

The rules for receiving unemployment insurance require the recipient to look for work in the field in which they were employed before they lost their job. Those same rules do not require them to take work for substantially less than they were previously earning. Rabel22's remarks about a labor shortage ignores that mowing lawns and roofing houses are jobs that many Americans will not take, and which the regulations governing the disbursement of unemployment insurance will not require them to take.

0 Replies

An ITIN is not equivalant to an SS number, and I would be very, very suprised to see someone getting a tax refund without a valid social security number. Also, you cannot substitute the ITIN for a social security number on a W-2 at the end of the year.

0 Replies

Roger, i wanted to comment on the content of your posts with regard to tax withholding, and FICA and Medicare withholding. I have also been responsible in small businesses for recording and depositing withholding funds. I have done this on paper on many occasions, and have done it over periods of years. There really is no way in hell for any but the smallest business to get away with not paying the withholding. I believe the threshhold for the move from depositing on a quarterly to a monthly basis is a total Withholding-FICA/Medicare annual deposit amount of $10,000 and from a monthly to a bi-weekly basis the thresshold is $50,000 annually. That equates to a very small business, one with annual gross receipts well under a million dollars.

About the only way i could conceive of an immigrant, legal or otherwise, going for years without paying federal taxes--FICA, FUTA, Medicare--would be as a sole proprietor business, and they'd have to stop paying any taxes at all. They would not be in a position to do work for anybody other than individuals or very small businesses, because other businesses would report their dealings with them, and many contracts, quite apart from government contracts, require that the contracted party prove that they pay their withholding obligations, pay prevailing wages and pay both liability and workers' compensation insurance.

Really, although it has many flaws, the tax system in this country is well set up to collect taxes long before your have an opportunity to file for a refund--and they make it damned difficult to operate in the normal business world without paying all of one's liabilities and meeting all of one's liability obligations.

0 Replies

ebrown_p wrote:

JustWonders wrote:

Just because taxes are withheld doesn't mean they are taxes paid.

Can you explain this? When the IRS takes my money, I consider that I am paying taxes-- whether I ask for some of it back or not.

Quote:
Millions of households pay no federal tax at all. When you factor in that those illegals that do file a return do so to receive a refund (using both illegally obtained SS numbers and ITINs) and that the vast majority erroneously receive the Earned Income Credit, the IRS is probably actually losing revenue.

I am pretty sure (based on people I know) that those with ITINs can not get the Earned Income Credit. The people that I know, don't.

If you get a refund, it is your money that is being refunded. If you get a refund on a illegally obtained SS number, you are still only being refunded money that you put into said SS number.

I am quite sure the IRS is not losing revenue from people paying taxes. I would like to see if you have any information that would back up this claim.

Quote:

The same would apply even if all 10 to 15 million illegals were suddenly to become legal. The US would see little to no increase in tax revenues.

In the short term you may be right (although you may be wrong even in the short term).

In the long term you are adding young, motivated workers. If these workers have access to education and can participate in the economy above board, there is no question that this will increase tax revenue.

Economists will tell you that especially with the baby boomer retirement, the US needs more residents of working age. The Social Security system is already propped up by immigrants including undocumented ones.

It is interesting to see the split in the Republican party between the business community and those who want a White Christian America. The business community isn't often allied with the left.

But then, they more than anyone understand the need for workers.

These immigration threads seem to always end up this way - one side hostile to the other. I don't know of anyone who wants a White Christian America, so I hope you're not serious about that, anyway.

But, back to your question. Take the border state of California. The fiscal impact of immigrants there is negative. Public service costs there exceeds taxes paid and agencies at the local, county and state levels are suffering. Since immigration is a Federal plan, they kick in some, but not nearly enough. The Labor Dept. of CA has documented this in studies, even while trying to show that immigration overall has a positive effect. (I know Cali was $12B in the red a few years ago, maybe that's changed with the Terminator, though - I should look it up).

Yes, you pay taxes. But, if you are a low-wage earner, you also take advantage of most of the entitlement programs offered at each level of government, including the Federal level. Some economists estimate that illegals cost the US over $40B a year, and in California each illegal immigrant will take around $50K in services from the state beyond what he'll contribute in taxes during his lifetime. It's estimated that the average California household must contribute at least $1200 each year to subsidize the difference between what immigrants cost in services and what they pay in taxes, and that's a conservative estimate.

I think immigration is a good thing. I agree with you that few of us will want to clean our homes or wash our cars or pick our own strawberries and that the majority of our immigrants, past and future, are motivated and hard working. But, I also think we have to face all the facts and dispel some of the myths. Of 100 Hispanic immigrants entering California high schools, 40 will drop out and only around 7% of all Hispanics hold college degrees. They make up only about 4.2% of the population, but they account for more than 10% of our poverty. Hispanics also account for almost 25% of California's prison population. They can't be propping up our SS system if they're locked up.

I don't think all those in the border states are xenophobic, anti-immigration or evil. And I don't think having this topic reduced to that kind of "us against them" mentality works toward figuring out what's best for either the natives or the immigrants. That's just my opinion, though.

0 Replies

roger wrote:

An ITIN is not equivalant to an SS number, and I would be very, very suprised to see someone getting a tax refund without a valid social security number. Also, you cannot substitute the ITIN for a social security number on a W-2 at the end of the year.

The reason illegals can get ITINs (which the IRS has been encouraging for those not eligible for SS numbers - including illegals) is because they don't share information with INS. Around 39% of illegal immigrant households receive EITC (up to $4,000) because of their native-born children and yes they do use the ITIN to file tax-returns. More fraud here since an IRS study shows more than a quarter of EITCs are paid out erroneously.

Quote:

sharing its data with other agencies.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,84745,00.html

Also, don't forget that many illegals are paid in cash with nothing withheld - no local, state, Medicare, SS or Federal taxes. The IRS doesn't like to work closely with INS, so they'll just say they don't know how to track foreign workers. Tax and immigration fraud seem to go hand in hand.

Then you have the problem of those bogus businesses (both large and small) claiming to sponsor immigrant workers, but according to the GAO, the overall total of unpaid tax assessments is $5.6B. Again, the IRS doesn't cooperate to corroborate the sponsoring companies' bona fides because it's illegal on the grounds of taxpayer confidentiality.

0 Replies

I don't know the dollar limits anymore, Set. Like you, I've never been with a company small enough to be other than a bi-weekly filer. Anyway, the limit applies to the highest (I believe) four quarters of a five quarter 'look-back' period. And I lack sufficient creativity to know how to pay workers, expense the wages, and not collect and report the taxes.

You point out the problem, from an employer standpoint, JW. IRS, SS admin, and INS simply do not work together. Neither do their rules. the ITIN is fine with the IRS. Give them the money, and they're happy. Social Security administration does not acknowledge it. W-2s are sent to SS, by the way, not the IRS, so how the devil do you prepare a W-2 without a social security number. Oh, and being ever helpful, SS tells you you may not demand to see a social security card. Honest. INS, of course requires proof of identity, and proof of eligilibility to work in the US. Figure out how to keep them all happy, and let me know.

0 Replies

JustWonders wrote:

I don't know of anyone who wants a White Christian America, so I hope you're not serious about that, anyway.

She's not, but then again, who wrote the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights? And what would be wrong with a Christian America? Just curious...

0 Replies

A white non-plural christian America is a fantasy, that is to say an IDEAL of racist minds. This principle applies as well to the ideal of a purely christian America, an ideal comparable to an Islamist's notion of a purely muslim theocratic society.THAT'S what's wrong with it.
I do not know anyone who admits to wanting or trying to create a "purely christian America". But I DO know people who would like to have (and believe we should have, and that GOD wants us to have) a society in which christians are in control.
Who wrote the Consitution? A bunch of men (only), most of whom believed in white and male superiority, with suffrage only for white property owning males.

0 Replies

cjhsa wrote:

JustWonders wrote:
I don't know of anyone who wants a White Christian America, so I hope you're not serious about that, anyway.

She's not, but then again, who wrote the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights? And what would be wrong with a Christian America? Just curious...

Cj,

Have I told you lately how much I love you. You make my points far better than I ever could.

0 Replies

In these discussions of economics legal status is overrated.

The US economy needs low wage workers. These workers, whereever they come from, need health care and housing. The fact is that White English-Speaking Christian Americans (or their African-American counterparts) aren't making enough babies to satisfy this need, and their offspring expect more than janitorial positions anyway.

Immigrants, legal and illegal, provide a source of motivated productive labor that immigrants have always injected into the US economy.

I believe that the numbers you all are using are misleading, but even if they are correct my point stands.

Any economy provides more services for low wage workers than it raises in taxes from them. The economy relies on this fact and any way you look at it it turns out to be a net benefit for the economy who needs low income workers.

The only issue is if a particular group is considered desirable or not.

The part of the equation that is an obvious win is education.

There is no question that the US needs more educated workers. The more people who go throught the US education system (provided they stay and contribute to the US economy) the better.

Better yet is motivated and successful young people who want to go to college.

There is no way to say that providing help to educate these bright students and keeping them for productive careers in the US is a bad thing for the economy...

0 Replies

Too bad JL and ebrown can't read. Must be the inner city schooling.

I never said anything about race, you two did (once again - why am I not surprised?). I simply asked the question, what would be wrong with a Christian America, the one our founding fathers had in mind when they wrote those documents?

0 Replies

I have nothing against having an America that respects and follows Christian ideals.

If we took seriously the Jesus who says "Blessed are the Peacemakers" when we contemplate war.

If we accepted Americans who willingly break laws when to act with compassion-- Just like Jesus did-- we would not be having these discussions.

If we took to heart the words of Jesus when he said "Do not resist the evil man" and "turn the other cheek" and "Love your neighbor (and your enemy)" the country would be a much better place.

I would absolutely love to live in a more Christian nation, if by Christian you mean people who follow the words and example of the Jesus of the Bible.

I purposely distinguish this from "White Christian" which is a very different religion from the one Jesus taught.

When Jesus taught compassion and forgiveness, White Christians teach harsh legalism and hatred.

When Jesus taught peace and love for enemies, White Christians want guns and the right to use them.

Where Jesus intervened to stop capital punishment (until he himself experienced it) White Christians champion it.

White Christianity is a uniquely American invention nurtured and matured in the Confederate South. It is usually the exact opposite of Jesus.

It loves guns, loudly judges anyone who is not like them, justifies hatred. It justified slavery, opposed civil rights and continues to break families.

In this culture war, I am opposed not to the religion of Jesus of the Bible-- but to the perverted Christianity of todays right wing.

The attack on immigrants is just a part of this. That is the only point I was trying to make.

0 Replies

cjhsa wrote:

I simply asked the question, what would be wrong with a Christian America, the one our founding fathers had in mind when they wrote those documents?

The contention that the founders had in mind a christian America is not only without foundation, it flies in the face of the evidence of their own lives and writings. They wanted a secular state, in which there were no establishment of religion and in which there were the free exercise thereof. They clearly state in their correspondence and personal papers that they extended this notion to all, including Jews and "Turks" (by which they meant Muslims).

0 Replies

Once again we go from the thread topic to "white Christians are bad".

What about the legal Mexican American CITIZENS who have joined the efforts of the minutemen?

0 Replies

cjhsa wrote:

What about the legal Mexican American CITIZENS who have joined the efforts of the minutemen?

What about it?

There are those of us who trace our Northern European roots here before the Revolution who think the minutemen are a bunch of foolish little men acting on an extremist world view. I would bet there are far more of us than there are Mexican Americans in the minutemen.

I also want to make clear the distinction between white Christians-- the people who act with compassion, forgiveness and love for their neighbors who happen to be white, and "White Christians" -- people who follow a perverse brand of "Christianity" that has nothing to do with compassion, forgiveness or love for ones neighbors.

There are many Christian churches that, based on their faith and convictions from the words of Jesus, support undocumented workers both physically and politically.

0 Replies

Mexico wants to dictate US Immigration Policy

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know