It's hardly armchair QBing.

What is missing is lars-ss acknowledging that many people correctly explained the tax credit long ago.

Can this thread and all the other tax related threads be moved to the new "Government and Taxes" group?

This thread, with credit to ag4ever, gives a good starting list.

https://www.greenhybrid.com/discuss/...ad.php?t=12123

Thanks

 

Uh, yeah it is armchair QBing...after we have several opinions/interpretations to compare, it is easy to wag a finger.

The bottom line is that Lars smelled smoke and he told us to look out for a fire. After much investigation, it was determined that there was no fire. I personally am glad that he raised the point, because his heart was in the right place, and I would rather have 10 false alarms than 1 errant dismissal of a legitimate issue.

What IF it played out as he initially thought? We would all be in a pretty strange and unhappy place. A number of things pertaining to these tax credits AND tax law in general don't make sense. It stands to reason that it is POSSIBLE that a loophole was written into these tax credits.

That's why most come to these forums...the SHARING of information. I don't think we need to spank someone who's trying to raise a point of discussion that is legitimate. To me, and I think most...$2600 is reason enough to sound the alarm.

 

With this, I think most agree. However, ...
You are missing the point almost as bad as Lars. We appreciated the heads up. Many investigated and found the heads up to be in error. Many tried to explain the error. Lars kept arguing his point, ignoring the well reasoned and well explained corrections, and he then posted new threads making the same wrong claims. Now we have reports of filed taxes proving he was wrong, and Lars has graciously, if long overdue, conceded the issue.

The point is, we do appreciate sharing information, but do NOT appreciate one obstinately refusing to learn from what others are trying to share and continuing to share known bad information long after is it clearly shown to be wrong.

If you insist on propagating information because you don't believe those arguing against you, and there is good reason to believe those arguing against you are not trolls or idiots, at the very least acknowledge the controversy. Lars should not have opened up new threads repeating his version as though it was well accepted fact in this thread.

-- Alan

 

I DO get the point...I understand that some have taken it far too personally that Lars didn't immediately capitulate when differing viewpoints were expressed. But how does that invoke their ire so greatly?

Why do they care if the guy needed to have a little extra convincing? Consider how hard you have to work to make $2600...well apply that to his skepticism of people who were NOT tax professionals and were merely asserting their own interpretations of the credit.

I understand people are salty that the guy pressed the issue...but who cares...it was discussed and the truth was discovered. Hell, how many times has the SAME question been asked over and over on this forum when people don't use the search button. It's part and parcel of being part of an internet forum...you can get your panties in a wad and let your blood pressure go through the roof each time it happens or you can blow it off and live an extra 7 years.

As I said before...I'd rather have someone pull 10 fire alarms in error than have one apathetic person see flames and figure it was someone else's job to warn the town.

On a side note...with them rolling out the Hybrid HOV program in Arizona, methinks it sucks that you have to own a Prius, or Honda to take advantage of it. Boo Hiss. Don't forget the Camrys Napolitano....the CAMRYS!

http://www.azfamily.com/news/local/s....6942cd3b.html

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by alan_in_tempe

Lars should not have opened up new threads repeating his version as though it was well accepted fact in this thread. -- Alan

Alan,

I don't recall doing that - "opening a new thread repeating my version?"

I only opened this thread in regard to taxes. And I did it without "Evil Intent" also - I was just putting forth MY PERSONAL TRANSLATION of a news story I found on the web - something ALL of us have done in the past if you have been around long enough.

And I did not ever "ignore" anyone else's perfectly good explanations. Even now, today, no one produced a single contradictory news story which refuted what I posted in my first post.

As I said earlier, apparently the only thing I did wrong was translate "non-refundable" into "cannot increase your refund" and I did it ONLY in the spirit of trying to make sure people did not get burned and not get the full tax credit which we all probably feel like we deserve for shelling out for a clean hybrid vehicle.

I'm going to KEEP ON posting news stories which I feel are pertinent to the hybrid community, and if in the future I "mis-translate" something again, well, it will not be with the intent of deception or "stirring up a hornet's nest" it will be with the goal of helping people.

That's what I do - I'm a people helper.

 

It would be difficult to produce a news story that talked about your translation of the first article you posted because you got it so mixed up. I can use your posted article to refute your translation.

"So if you purchase a hybrid that comes with a tax credit of $2,200, and your tax bill is $2,000, you’ll lose $200 of the tax value of the credit. The excess credit cannot be carried over to another year."

It simply says if your tax bill is less than your tax credit you can only deduct what you own. This has nothing to do with your withholdings.

Long after many people here explained this you continued in other threads to talk about how you reduced your withholdings so you wouldn't lose the tax credit, which was totally incorrect.

As of 2/3/2007 you still were saying that withholdings effect your hybrid tax credit, apparently ignoring others correct explanations on this and other threads.

Withholding does not effect your hybrid tax credit and there are no news articles that say it does.

On this issue you're a people confuser.

 

OK I'm a little bit tired of hearing people say "it has nothing to do with your withholdings."

I have been involved with and DOING PAYROLL for about 17 years now. I understand the tax process from both ends, unlike some people who only understand it from the "I do my own taxes every year" end.

Let me state a fact for a second:

Any and EVERY tax deduction and credit you take, when you are attempting to decide how much of a tax refund you are getting or calculating how much you owe, involves using your TOTAL TAX WITHHELD BY YOUR EMPLOYER as a factor in the calculation.

That's because the amount of withholding you have paid in for the year directly affects your tax refund, no matter what else is factored in before or after that number. Whether you withheld too much or too little or just the right amount - it IS a factor.

Your refund is calculated by many factors, and the "taxes owed" is one of them. "Taxes owed" is reduced by the amount of "taxes paid" and "taxes paid = withholding" so let's not get silly folks.

And what I said about my withholding situation was and still is EXACTLY CORRECT. Had my employer withheld MORE for the year, then I would have lost MORE of my hybrid tax credit. There is no doubting of that fact. But the REASON it is a fact in my situation is that I am in the unusual situation of OWING TAXES and not getting a refund - so I'm looking at this from the other side of most people's situation - those people who are calculating a refund.

If that's confusing to anyone, then it's just because they are not seeing it from the angle I am seeing it.

Anyone who lost sleep thinking they would not get an increased tax refund by factoring in their hybrid tax credit, then I have already apologized for making that mistake.

But I'm not mistaken in saying what I have said in this post. Your taxes owed or the taxes refunded to you has a DIRECT LINK to the amount of taxes you paid during the year which is your WITHHOLDING AMOUNT.

LAterz DuDeS.....

 

Withholding of course effects your refund, but it has nothing to do with whether you can take the hybrid tax credit.

You did not lose any hybrid tax credit because of your withholdings, if you did you have done your taxes wrong.

 

Au Contraire......

This is where the "non-refundable" clause comes into effect. I owe $2389 in taxes. After my $2600 hybrid tax credit is applied, I owe Zero and I am owed a refund of Zero.

Thus I only got the benefit of $2389 out of the $2600 I could have received.

That $211 is the amount I "lost" from the tax credit. Same thing will happen to any taxpayer who ends up "owing" less money than their hybrid tax credit.

Disclaimer: Again, this has nothing to do with people who overpaid and are receiving refunds.

Not wanting to be argumentative or start anything, and it's no big deal, just wanted to point out that what I said about MY tax situation is not incorrect.

 

I give up, you have yet to show how your withholdings had any bearing on your hybrid tax credit. If it did you've done your taxes wrong.