Dave Call of the Day

Click here to E-mail Chris

Search Blog

 Get the Stigall's Podcast RSS Feed 
 Stigall Podcast Archive 


GRANDMA GOT RUN OVER BY OBAMA
CLICK HERE to listen and download the song today!
If you are not a Talking Head Member 
Click here to register

 

Beat the Tweet

Stigall Podcast Feed
Click the Clip you wish to hear, then after the blogger page opens click the News headline link to download and hear the audio.

Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:03:17 -0400 -
Stigall talked with Chris Butler of Butler, Lanz and Wagler about the G20 contradictions, JonahGoldberg's new column, and the "uptick" in consumer spending (wink).

Click to add Chris on Facebook!

Stigall's Show Notes
Jun 16

Written by: Brian
6/16/2009 6:42 AM 

 

 

 

Tax Man's Target: The Mobile Phone

 

The use of company-issued mobile phones could trigger new federal income taxes on millions of Americans as a "fringe benefit."

The Internal Revenue Service proposed employers assign 25% of an employee's annual phone expenses as a taxable benefit. Under that scenario, a worker in the 28% tax bracket, whose wireless device costs the company $1,500 a year, could see $105 in additional federal income tax.

The IRS, in a notice issued this week, said employees could avoid tax liability if they showed proof they used personal cellphones for nonbusiness calls during work hours. The agency also could decide on a set number of phone minutes as "minimal personal use" that would be untaxed.

In a third option proposed by the IRS, employers could use a statistical sampling to determine what portion of workers' cellphone use is personal and how much is work-related. Workers would be taxed on the difference.

The IRS move, which is spurring efforts by the wireless industry and others to kill the idea, would mark a stricter enforcement of an existing rule that classifies employer-provided cellphones as a taxable benefit, rather than a 24-hour-a-day work tool.

Under a 1989 law, workers who use company-provided mobile phones for personal calls are supposed to count the value of those calls as income and pay federal income taxes accordingly.

But businesses and workers have long ignored the requirement, prompting the IRS to consider steps the agency said would make it easier for businesses and workers to comply.

Some firms said they have ignored the tax because of the paperwork required to account for personal and work calls. U.S. companies allow incidental personal use for about 40% of employees with cellphones, according to a survey by In-Stat, a market research firm.

IRS Weighs New Cell Phone Tax Rules

2:15

The IRS is weighing a proposal to deem one-quarter of employees' use of work cell phones as personal use, and therefore subject to tax as a fringe benefit. Dow Jones Newswires' Martin Vaughan explains.

"The idea that you should keep a log saying, 'I made a call saying I will be late for dinner again,' that's a totally cumbersome and burdensome requirement that most employers and employees are not going to comply with," said Jot Carpenter, vice president of government affairs for CTIA-The Wireless Association, a trade group of cellphone-equipment manufacturers and service providers.

"It would be a nightmare for corporations to try to figure out what are work calls and what are personal calls," said Gerry Coady, chief information officer at Frontier Airlines Holdings Inc., who manages about 100 BlackBerrys for workers at the Denver-based airline.

Some employees aren't so happy about the idea, either.

"Your job gives you a phone to be in 24-hour contact. It's only natural that you're going to use it personally," said Anthony Cecchini, an analyst at investment bank Oppenheimer & Co. "If I need to get a personal email or call, it shouldn't be a big deal."

Individual taxes on employer-issued cellphones and smart phones would depend on the annual cost of the wireless service, as well as an employee's tax bracket.

The IRS didn't respond to requests for interviews on the tax. The agency will collect comment on its proposal through September before issuing a decision.

The mobile-phone industry has a big stake in the outcome. U.S. businesses will spend an estimated $59 billion on cellular voice service for employees in 2009, according to research by In-Stat. The market has been a big revenue source for wireless carriers, though it has taken a hit in the recession.

[talk time]

Cellphone companies worry, for example, that client firms wishing to avoid trouble with the IRS will cancel wireless contracts and instead reimburse employees for a portion of their personal cellphone.

David Lemelin, a telecom analyst, said enforcement of the tax could discourage sales employees from tending to customers after hours. "Personal use of cellular in these instances has increasingly become considered a cost of doing business," he said.

Wireless companies also argue the IRS rule is outdated. Rates have declined so dramatically in the past decade -- with night and weekend calls free under many plans -- that it makes little sense for the IRS to assess employee benefits by nickels and dimes.

"This is a regulation from a bygone time, dating back to the infancy of the cellphone business, and it is in desperate need of updating," said Howard Woolley, a senior vice president with Verizon Wireless, a venture of Verizon Communications Inc. and Vodafone Group PLC.

Such companies as Verizon and Sprint Nextel Corp. are backing congressional proposals to repeal the tax. They are supported by local government, education and farm groups.

"This is an outdated regulation that was established at the infancy of our industry," Sprint spokesman John Taylor said. "We don't think it's really relevant in today's economy."

Over the past couple of years, the IRS has begun challenging employers over the accounting of workers' cellphone expenses during tax audits, said Mr. Carpenter, the trade-group spokesman.

The 1989 law requires that company-provided wireless services be included in a worker's gross income -- unless the employee keeps detailed records showing the device was used only for work.

Following one IRS audit, the University of California system owed additional payroll taxes because it couldn't substantiate that employees' cellphone use was solely work-related.

John Harper, the mayor of Rowlett, Texas, said his town wrestled with whether to declare as worker income a portion of the 100 cellphones provided to city employees, but decided it was too much work.

"I'm all for collecting taxes for the government," he said, "but let's not end up costing us more to do it than the tax you ultimately collect."

—Ben Worthen contributed to this article.

Write to Martin Vaughan at martin.vaughan@dowjones.com and Amol Sharma atamol.sharma@wsj.com

----------------------------------------------

 

June 13, 2009

Brit Paper Outs Obama's Shrinking City Plan

Lee Cary
The U.K. Telegraph reports that the Obama administration is studying a vast urban renewal project for America.

Several British papers are keeping closer track on the Obama administration than the U.S. legacy media. On June 12, the Telegraph reported:

“Dozens of US cities may have entire neighbourhoods bulldozed as part of drastic "shrink to survive" proposals being considered by the Obama administration to tackle economic decline.
 
The government is looking at expanding a pioneering scheme in Flint, one of the poorest US cities, which involves razing entire districts and returning the land to nature.

Local politicians believe the city must contract by as much as 40 per cent, concentrating the dwindling population and local services into a more viable area.

The radical experiment is the brainchild of Dan Kildee, treasurer of Genesee County, which includes Flint.

Having outlined his strategy to Barack Obama during the election campaign, Mr. Kildee has now been approached by the US government and a group of charities who want him to apply what he has learnt to the rest of the country.

Mr. Kildee said he will concentrate on 50 cities, identified in a recent study by the Brookings Institution, an influential Washington think-tank, as potentially needing to shrink substantially to cope with their declining fortunes.”

Obama witnessed a comparatively miniature version of this urban strategy in Mayor Daley’s Plan for Transformation. Last September, American Thinker cited a study from the Center for Urban Research and Policy at Columbia University concerning Chicago’s plan.

“The City of Chicago has been a proving ground in the national movement for public housing reform. Across the city, public housing developments are being demolished and families are being relocated to new homes in new communities. The goals are to transform the lives of public housing residents and to rebuild healthy communities where distressed public housing once stood. The experiences of family relocation and resettlement in Chicago have informed other cities facing similar challenges, making Chicago the national model for large-scale public housing transformation.

... The Chicago Housing Authority's (CHA, hereafter) Plan for Transformation, launched in 1999 seeks to accomplish several goals over a ten-year period. The CHA aims to destroy 18,000 "severely distressed" housing units and help thousands of public housing families become employed, independent citizens. Its relocation efforts promise to integrate them into the wider city; and, its redevelopment strategy promises to rebuild the lands into "mixed-income" tracts suitable for both public housing and private market families. It is a grand vision for a public housing authority and it is a historically novel role for city, state, and federal governments.”

So how’s it working in Chicago?  Not so well according to the Chicago Tribune:

“A Tribune investigation found that almost nine years into what was billed as a 10-year program, the city has completed only 30 percent of the plan's most ambitious element-tearing down entire housing projects and replacing them with new neighborhoods where poor, working-class and wealthier families would live side by side.”

Valerie Jarrett, a senior White House adviser to Obama, Michelle’s former boss in the Office of the Mayor of Chicago, and the former president of a property company that managed several large Chicago Public Housing projects, played an active role the Plan for Transformation.  When asked why one large venture, the Stateway Project, was failing she said,

"I don't think it's constructive to look backward and say it's a mistake. It was a very good idea that didn't come to fruition."   

One thing the Plan for Transformation has been successful at doing, though, is displace thousands of poor families out of their homes without alternative housing available.

Brace yourself for urban renewal on steroids and an enhanced federal debt as one consequence. 

Update Paul Tholfsen remembers:

"We had to destrroy the village in order to save it"


Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/06/brit_paper_outs_obamas_shrinki.html at June 16, 2009 - 09:08:22 AM EDT
-------------------------------------------------------------------
June 12, 2009
 

A.I.G. Balks at Claims From Jet Ditching in Hudson

For the first couple of days after his flight ditched into the Hudson River, Paul Jorgenson was just glad to be alive. But then he started to need his laptop, his wallet, his car keys — all the essentials he had stowed under his seat and left behind in the sinking plane.

A pleasant woman at US Airways told him not to worry; he would be made whole for his losses. But then the matter shifted to US Airways’ insurer, the American International Group, operating under government stewardship since its bailout last fall.

“Everything went downhill,” said Mr. Jorgenson, a software executive in Charlotte, N.C., whose laptop and keys have not been recovered.

When a homeowner has a burglary or a driver has a crash, all it normally takes is a call to the insurance company and a description of the loss to activate the policy. But aviation liability insurance is different. It is activated by a finding of negligence on the part of an airline. If there is no negligence, then arguably there is no liability, and no obligation to pay claims.

That poses a problem for the passengers of US Airways Flight 1549. They suffered real losses and injuries, but they are widely perceived as having been saved from sudden, violent death by their heroic and quick-thinking flight crew, led by Capt. Chesley B. Sullenberger.

“Insurance companies try to protect their assets, obviously,” said Bruce D. Chadbourne, a co-author of the book, “Introduction to Aviation Insurance and Risk Management,” and a professor in the business school at Embry Riddle Aeronautical University in Daytona Beach, Fla. With the airline wearing a halo, A.I.G. “is going to play hardball.”

A spokeswoman for A.I.G.’s property and casualty business declined to comment.

“I wish I had a hammer to get them to do the right thing,” said Andrew J. Maloney, a partner in the New York firm of Kreindler & Kreindler, which specializes in aviation litigation. He is representing some of the US Airways passengers but has not filed any lawsuits. “They’re riding a wave of feel-good opinion about how well the flight crew handled the bird strike.”

A spokesman for US Airways, Morgan Durrant, said the airline issued each passenger a check for $5,000 shortly after the accident to cover their immediate needs; it had no legal obligation to do so. He declined to discuss the airline’s liability insurance policy or claims processes, saying the matter was pending and he did not want to jeopardize it.

Those familiar with industry practices said it would be many months before the issue of liability was resolved.

Tess Sosa, who was aboard Flight 1549 with her husband, 4-year-old daughter and infant son, said she suffered a mild concussion during the landing, and her husband was treated for a leg injury and hypothermia. The family, from New York, continues to get hospital bills, she said. But her top priority was getting the insurer to pay for therapy to reduce the risk of post-traumatic stress disorder for her and her daughter.

Because the plane was full on the day of the accident, she and her baby were seated near the wings, while her husband and daughter were far in the rear. The plane struck the water tail-first, and water began pouring in where Mr. Sosa and daughter Sophia were sitting.

Ms. Sosa, clambering over seats toward the front of the plane with her son in her arms, looked back and caught a horrifying glimpse of her husband standing in the deepening water, trying to hold their daughter above the surface.

“I can tell you, he was looking straight at me and he didn’t even see me,” she said. Since then she has been haunted by the image, and the feeling that in her escape she abandoned her husband and daughter.

Ms. Sosa said Sophia “remembers everything. I just want her to walk away from this knowing that we did everything we could to make it make sense.” A.I.G. agents have told her that for therapy she should use her own health insurance, but it has a $3,000 deductible for mental health care.

“Why should we be paying out of pocket?” she said. “That’s why they’re there. They’re the insurer.”

Aviation insurance specialists said that an airline’s liability insurer is not normally there for medical bills after a plane crash. Passengers’ health insurance may indeed pay first — for passengers who have it — or workers’ compensation for passengers traveling on business. Later, if liability is established, those insurers circle back and try to get reimbursed from the airline’s liability insurer.

But that does not help accident survivors who have expenses in the meantime.

A.I.G. has told Ms. Sosa and other passengers that it would pay for therapy, but only for three sessions.

“It’s like telling me, ‘We aren’t responsible for this. This is your trauma. You deal with it,’ ” Ms. Sosa said.

In one exasperated conversation with an A.I.G. claims official, she invoked the taxpayer bailout, saying she doubted Congress and the Obama administration would approve of the stonewalling. The official “told me their division didn’t get a cent from the bailout,” she said.

Mr. Jorgenson, the software executive, said he did not have unpaid medical bills, but was frustrated about his claims for missing possessions. He sells specialized software to hedge funds and other investment companies, and must travel frequently to financial centers, wearing expensive suits and shoes, and carrying valuable computer equipment. He recently got some of his clothing back from the airline but the shoes were ruined, he said. One suit was missing its jacket, and his cufflinks and sunglasses are still gone. He got his wallet back but not the cash it held, he said.

Because he could document losses of more than $5,000, A.I.G. sent him a second $5,000, with a letter saying he could get an additional $10,000 if he signed a statement releasing it from any further claims. Other passengers are also being asked to sign the release in exchange for $10,000.

Mr. Jorgenson said he thought this was disingenuous, because some degree of liability might eventually be established. Then A.I.G.’s policy would be in play, but the passengers would have signed away their claims.

Mr. Chadbourne said he was not surprised to see A.I.G. holding firm.

“They really cannot row their own boat, totally, because they’ve got other people that they are making decisions for,” he said, explaining that an aviation liability policy typically spreads the risks among 8 or 10 insurers, with one lead underwriter — in this case A.I.G. — handling claims on behalf of the group. (Although A.I.G. is not the lead underwriter on the missing Air France flight, it is part of an insurance pool with potential liability.)

“Even though they’re giving the passengers a hard time, eventually they will be compensated to some extent,” he said. “There’s no big pot because there’s no death. But there’s still mental distress, and it is a compensatable illness which, eventually, in my opinion, they deserve. They went through hell.”

 

 

 

Tags:
Stigall's Corner
Stephanie Moore Campaign Slogan -

 Stephanie Moore is running for her husbands seat.  We need some great campaign slogans for her.  Send them to studio@710kcmo.com .  

 
Stigall's Latest Big Hollywood Column -

Stigall has a great article called 'Speech Police - Balzing Saddles would never get made' about where we've come with speech and the free exercise thereof.

 
Stigall's Weekly Platte County Landmark Column -

Read Stigall's column from the Platte County Landmark every week, Straight from Stigall.

 
Latest stigall video
Stigall Tube