http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050719/ap_ ... _mart_bank

Great for the Mormon Church, which collects a percent of an employee's income pre-tax (up to 10%, voluntary) - the more jobs in Utah, the more potential revenue for the church.

Members of the church are OK with that, what's your problem with it? It's not like the LDS is the only church that asks for donations.

Did I say I was "okay" or was not "okay" with it? I made an observation is all actually.

To my knowledge, having worked for a company based in Utah (Novell), the state of Utah has a law (and perhaps there is a federal law that goes with it, given that we're talking pre-tax dollars?) that allows pre-tax dollars to automatically come out of a person's check,... do other states have similar laws ? Educate me.

c-

PS: Every time Novell had to lay anyone off, the LAST place they did it was home base. They even spend millions to build a building on property they owned in San Jose, CA (Sales Headquarters) only to pull all those jobs eventually back to Provo, UT - I think eBay occupy's the building/land now.

It probably has something to do with your constant use of the "eyeroll", particularly when it follows a comment about revenue for a church.

I eye roll in real life just as often.... I was on a conference call years ago and the guy in Provo explained what he wanted of us, then he said "Is Christine rolling her eyes now?" and we all laughed because, yes, I had just done so.


So there is no discussion or debate or opinion about State (or Federal) Law allowing pre-tax money to be given to a church (making the remaining taxable income a lower dollar amount against which taxes are collected for public works)? That surprises me,....my fellow RM'ers are known for strong opinions on such things

c-

You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

I have no problem with pre-tax money going to any charity. I had to struggle and be an annoying bastard all spring just to get my health insurance taken out pre-tax. Saved me about $200 per month doing that.

I love that film! Okay, nor more eye rolling

Even if it going to a charity (or church) means that less taxes are collected for public works (schools, roads, local law enforcement, or whatever our tax dollars are supposed to be funding)? I'm not being argumentative, I'm just curious as to how it all pans out #'s wise.


I've also noticed, relative to Health Insurance deductions, that when someone tries to sit down and calculate out your annual income off of a pay stub, it is "off" and they have to ask about it.... It's as if they tell you that you earn X amount of dollars annually but it doesn't really look that way on paper or something. It hasn't happened to me in a while otherwise I could explain myself better....

c-

I was paying my health insurance myself outside of work. I had my boss pay my health insurance directly and reduce my salary by the amount he was paying. It amounted to about $200 more take home each month. Why the hell should I have to pay income tax on salary that is going straight to an insurance company when people who have health insurance through their jobs have it taken out before taxes?

So now my salary is about $11,000 less on paper, but I make more money.

Because the $11,000 you're spending isn't taxed, you make more money?

Yes.

I'll use some real numbers. My insurance costs about $975 per month. Times 12 months is about $11,000. On that $11,000 worth of salary I was paying around 25% in payroll taxes and stuff. Now I don't get that $11,000 in salary, which was going right out the door to the insurance company anyway, AND I don't have to pay the 25% in payroll taxes on that money either, and my insurance is paid for by the company. It's win-win for everybody except the IRS. It's just another expense on the books for my company, and I have more take home pay because I pay less income tax.

Also, unlike actual out of pocket medical expenses, you can't deduct heath insurance premiums if you pay them after taxes. But it's OK if the premiums are taken out before taxes.

I recommend everyone see if their company can do this for you, or for all the employees for that matter. Pay 100% of health insurance and reduce salaries. It works for everybody.

You can? Doesn't it have to be over some huge dollar amount though?

Damn dude, 11 grand a year, that's just nuts. Through the hospital Casey works for, we pay like $9 a month for the whole family for everything.

That's obscene that you pay that much for health insurance. Pre-tax deductions are an incredible benefit that most people overlook.

Unlike PD's health insurance payments that money is deductable anyway. Even if they tax it up front you're going to get it back anyway. I guess the only difference is maybe the gov't can make some interest on your money before they have to pay it back.

To deduct health insurance premiums or any other medical expenses, it has to be greater than 7.5% of your adjusted gross income.

Obviously, we exceed the 7.5% threshold if you include insurance premiums, but we were told this year that the premiums were not deuctible, only the out of pocket expenses (which we were at closer to 3.5% of income for).

That's nothing. I'm working off a COBRA from last job because the insurance through my current employer would be more like 21,000 per year. This is because I work for a company with 8 employees and one of my bosses has a son who is severely disabled so he can't get a decent rate. At some point soon, I'm going to have to find new insurance or a new job because my COBRA runs out May 1, 2006.

If you and your family are relatively healthy, I'm pretty sure you could get insurance on your own for less than $21,000 per year. I'm pretty sure that insurance premiums are still included under medical expenses within 7.5%.