Tax break on a new car purchase?
#21
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Dallas
Posts: 815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Mocky,Nov 28 2009, 04:17 PM
^
I think people are confusing a "credit" and a "deduction". I'd love for this to be a credit, but it's not, it's a deduction.
Thanks for posting that up Gary
I think people are confusing a "credit" and a "deduction". I'd love for this to be a credit, but it's not, it's a deduction.
Thanks for posting that up Gary
#23
Originally Posted by xmatt,Nov 29 2009, 12:17 PM
Yeah, that's correct. I think a lot of people are confused because originally it was going to be a tax credit, but after congress got a lot of good publicity, they quietly nerfed the bill to make it just a deduction.
#24
Originally Posted by nearwater4me,Nov 30 2009, 10:35 AM
I see. So how much aproximately would one get back?
Is the benefit significant?
Dan
Is the benefit significant?
Dan
I found this on the sound money matters site.. someone posted this... I think it sums it up...
-
First, per the IRS, it is not a tax credit, but a deduction. Deductions are a reduction in your taxable income. Credits are much more valuable because they are direct reductions in the tax you pay. For example, a deduction of $1 means that you save $0.35 on taxes if you are in the 35% tax bracket. A credit of $1 means you save $1 in taxes, no matter what your tax bracket.
Second, the estimated savings of $1500 on a new $25,000 car was based on the proposal, not the final law. As you noted, the original proposal included a tax deduction for car loan interest. However, it was left out of the final law. From Sen. Mikulski’s (amendment author) website (http://mikulski.senate.gov/_pdfs/Pre...xamendment.pdf), the $1500 savings was broken down into $420 savings from sales tax deduction and $1133 savings from interest deduction. Since the interest deduction was left off, the savings for the average family is only $420.
Third, because it is “above the line,” the tax saved will be significantly less than the sales tax paid. Imagine I paid $25000 for a car. Using the Senator’s assumption of 6% sales tax, I would have $1500 of sales tax that I pay at the time of the purchase to the state. This is how Sen. Mikulski can say that that this would increase state sales tax revenue. However, when I got around to filing my taxes, I would get to subtract $1500 from my income. This would reduce my federal income tax by the above $420. So, even if the federal government cuts the state benefits by the same amount as the tax cut, the state would still be up by $1000.
Sorry for the long diatribe. Your best advice is spot on. Shop for a car as if this tax savings didn’t exist, because for most of us, the savings would be less than 1 car payment.
--
#25
I've been taking sales tax deductions on car purchases for years now - no change from my perspective. (I suspect this incentive is only a benefit for citizens of states w/ income taxes)
#26
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,848
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Mocky,Nov 30 2009, 06:58 AM
it's definitely not the same as a credit... it depends on several factors but you can check online and can probably get a rough estimate.
I found this on the sound money matters site.. someone posted this... I think it sums it up...
-
First, per the IRS, it is not a tax credit, but a deduction. Deductions are a reduction in your taxable income. Credits are much more valuable because they are direct reductions in the tax you pay. For example, a deduction of $1 means that you save $0.35 on taxes if you are in the 35% tax bracket. A credit of $1 means you save $1 in taxes, no matter what your tax bracket.
Second, the estimated savings of $1500 on a new $25,000 car was based on the proposal, not the final law. As you noted, the original proposal included a tax deduction for car loan interest. However, it was left out of the final law. From Sen. Mikulski’s (amendment author) website (http://mikulski.senate.gov/_pdfs/Pre...xamendment.pdf), the $1500 savings was broken down into $420 savings from sales tax deduction and $1133 savings from interest deduction. Since the interest deduction was left off, the savings for the average family is only $420.
Third, because it is “above the line,” the tax saved will be significantly less than the sales tax paid. Imagine I paid $25000 for a car. Using the Senator’s assumption of 6% sales tax, I would have $1500 of sales tax that I pay at the time of the purchase to the state. This is how Sen. Mikulski can say that that this would increase state sales tax revenue. However, when I got around to filing my taxes, I would get to subtract $1500 from my income. This would reduce my federal income tax by the above $420. So, even if the federal government cuts the state benefits by the same amount as the tax cut, the state would still be up by $1000.
Sorry for the long diatribe. Your best advice is spot on. Shop for a car as if this tax savings didn’t exist, because for most of us, the savings would be less than 1 car payment.
--
I found this on the sound money matters site.. someone posted this... I think it sums it up...
-
First, per the IRS, it is not a tax credit, but a deduction. Deductions are a reduction in your taxable income. Credits are much more valuable because they are direct reductions in the tax you pay. For example, a deduction of $1 means that you save $0.35 on taxes if you are in the 35% tax bracket. A credit of $1 means you save $1 in taxes, no matter what your tax bracket.
Second, the estimated savings of $1500 on a new $25,000 car was based on the proposal, not the final law. As you noted, the original proposal included a tax deduction for car loan interest. However, it was left out of the final law. From Sen. Mikulski’s (amendment author) website (http://mikulski.senate.gov/_pdfs/Pre...xamendment.pdf), the $1500 savings was broken down into $420 savings from sales tax deduction and $1133 savings from interest deduction. Since the interest deduction was left off, the savings for the average family is only $420.
Third, because it is “above the line,” the tax saved will be significantly less than the sales tax paid. Imagine I paid $25000 for a car. Using the Senator’s assumption of 6% sales tax, I would have $1500 of sales tax that I pay at the time of the purchase to the state. This is how Sen. Mikulski can say that that this would increase state sales tax revenue. However, when I got around to filing my taxes, I would get to subtract $1500 from my income. This would reduce my federal income tax by the above $420. So, even if the federal government cuts the state benefits by the same amount as the tax cut, the state would still be up by $1000.
Sorry for the long diatribe. Your best advice is spot on. Shop for a car as if this tax savings didn’t exist, because for most of us, the savings would be less than 1 car payment.
--
Had my hopes up a little too high. lol.
Dan
#28
Bought an '09 in April
Make to much $$ to qualify
J/K
Make to much $$ to qualify
J/K
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
GreenmanS2000
UK & Ireland S2000 Community
31
08-14-2014 08:16 AM
stockae92
California - Southern California S2000 Owners
5
11-25-2009 02:21 PM
S2LEGEND
New York - Metro New York S2000 Owners
9
02-11-2009 10:04 AM