A deal has been reached in the Fiscal cliff.
Sequester delayed by two months.
"It
would also temporarily delay the sequester -- i.e., billions of dollars
in across-the-board spending cuts -- for another two months. The cost
of continuing current spending levels will be paid for through an even
mix of tax revenue increases and later spending cuts. Half of those cuts
will come from defense spending; half will come from nondefense
spending."
So the pain continues however it looks like 5% cuts
for the labs at least. RIF's who knows. However we pay LLNLs and LANS 5%
of our lab budget so maybe we have an idea of where to cut?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts you viewed tbe most last 30 days
-
LGBT intolerance problem at Sandia? I was just checking glassdoor.com and noticed several comments suggesting intolerance to LGBT at Sandia...
-
So did you SSVSP and why? Give details.
-
“Raise a concern, get blackballed then lose your job and benefits…” “…instead of raising your concerns just leverage on your skills and go t...
27 comments:
The House has yet to vote on the Senate Bill.
YEP - No deal yet!
So you think there will be no lay-offs and all will be well or is LLNL still going to dump one to two thousand people starting tomorrow 1-2-2013 and get this done so we can move on. Will someone just tell the truth please no matter what the facts are?
Not to mention that the sequester has simply been delayed. There is no indication that there will be a 5%, 10% or 50% cut for the labs. Any speculation at this point is a waste of time.
A tax increase for those making over 400k is really going hurt the managers LLNs and LANLs. They are going to be in a very bad mood and blame the workers.
The budget agreement says nothing about 5%.
The two month delay in spending cuts actually hurts the Labs - a decision one way or another could have been disected and then dealt with. What to do now? Which way to turn now? How do we plan? I'm sure the workerbees will be filled with angst as they worry about their jobs....
Why did old sourpuss scold those on the other side of the aisle after they both accomplished something successful.
He's sure never coached a team of kids or anyone who he needs to win over.
Instead of building on success and passing our congratulations widely to both sides, to build essential bonds, he scolds, undermines the success, loses the opportunity to set the future course, sets conditions and in general acts like a man with piles...a scolding, exhausted Woodrow Wilson who lost the league of nations because he was a self-righteous scold. Not the approach Kennedy, Reagan, Ford, or Clinton or other consensus builders would have taken.
He doesn't seem to care that he does not have enough leverage to lead the whole country, and that the country needs him to lead the consensus as he just did.
Good work, Mr. President. You and those you work with, successfully tackled an urgent element of very difficult problem, breaking it into parts, and tackling the most important part. Keep up the good work. We look forward to working through the next part.
Emphasizing your successes and building on them, while overcoming your weaknesses is the way a losing team improves, builds confidence and becomes successful.
Yeah. Uniting the country is old.
"Emphasizing your successes and building on them, while overcoming your weaknesses is the way a losing team improves, builds confidence and becomes successful.
January 1, 2013 9:49 PM"
At the NNSA labs we do the opposite, we build on our weaknesses and destroy confidence.
A tax increase for those making over 400k is really going hurt the managers LLNs and LANLs. They are going to be in a very bad mood and blame the workers.
January 1, 2013 8:37 PM
Going to be? This has been their modus from day-one of the LLNS/LANS "takeover".
A tax increase for those making over 400k is really going hurt the managers LLNs and LANLs. They are going to be in a very bad mood and blame the workers.
January 1, 2013 8:37 PM
Going to be? This has been their modus from day-one of the LLNS/LANS "takeover".
The Senate deal to avoid the "fiscal cliff" will add roughly $4 trillion to the deficit when compared to current law, according to new numbers from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).
It is the worker's fault for all of this mess. Lab management should get a big bonus for having to deal with such troublesome employees who put what management says onto blogs like this. Such disloyalty.
Don't worry. The lab will take care of these people. It knows how to retaliate against employees without exposing itself to much legal liability. They are truly the pros when it comes to retaliation and blackballing. Blogging about how bad management is at the lab? Get ready to get tea-bagged, you disloyal freak. Think you can sue the lab? Snowball's chance in hell.
Washington Post summary of the approved Fiscal Clift Deal
— Tax rates will permanently rise to Clinton-era levels for families with income above $450,000 and individuals above $400,000. All income below the threshold will permanently be taxed at Bush-era rates.
— The tax on capital gains and dividends will be permanently set at 20 percent for those with income above the $450,000/$400,000 threshold. It will remain at 15 percent for everyone else. (Clinton-era rates were 20 percent for capital gains and taxed dividends as ordinary income, with a top rate of 39.6 percent.)
— The estate tax will be set at 40 percent for those at the $450,000/$400,000 threshold, with a $5 million exemption. That threshold will be indexed to inflation, as a concession to Republicans and some Democrats in rural areas like Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mt.).
— The sequester will be delayed for two months. Half of the delay will be offset by discretionary cuts, split between defense and non-defense. The other half will be offset by revenue raised by the voluntary transfer of traditional IRAs to Roth IRAs, which would tax retirement savings when they’re moved over.
— The pay freeze on members of Congress, which Obama had lifted this week, will be re-imposed.
— The 2009 expansion of tax breaks for low-income Americans: the Earned Income Tax Credit, the Child Tax Credit, and the American Opportunity Tax Credit will be extended for five years.
— The Alternative Minimum Tax will be permanently patched to avoid raising taxes on the middle-class.
— The deal will not address the debt-ceiling, and the payroll tax holiday will be allowed to expire.
— Two limits on tax exemptions and deductions for higher-income Americans will be reimposed: Personal Exemption Phaseout (PEP) will be set at $250,000 and the itemized deduction limitation (Pease) kicks in at $300,000.
—The full package of temporary business tax breaks — benefiting everything from R&D and wind energy to race-car track owners — will be extended for another year.
— Scheduled cuts to doctors under Medicare would be avoided for a year through spending cuts that haven’t been specified.
— Federal unemployment insurance will be extended for another year, benefiting those unemployed for longer than 26 weeks. This $30 billion provision won’t be offset.
— A nine-month farm bill fix will be attached to the deal, Sen. Debbie Stabenow told reporters, averting the newly dubbed milk cliff.
"The other half will be offset by revenue raised by the voluntary transfer of traditional IRAs to Roth IRAs, which would tax retirement savings when they’re moved over."
Huh?
Roth IRA conversions
From Wall Street Journal MarketWatch
Jan. 2, 2013
A provision in the bill makes it easier for investors to roll a 401(k) or 403(b) into a Roth IRA. Like the other plans, a Roth is a tax-advantaged retirement accounts. The big difference: 401(k) investors contribute pretax dollars, but pay taxes when they withdraw money in retirement. Roth IRA investors pay tax on that income up front, but can withdraw money later tax-free.
Why does it matter when you pay? Savers that expect to pay higher rates in retirement — because they expect overall taxes to rise or expect to be wealthier — may want to get the tax payment out of the way sooner rather than later. Since most employers offer 401(k) plans, workers typically don’t have a choice about which type of plan works best for the bulk of their savings. Previously, they could convert their 401(k) to a Roth IRA, but only if they left their job or were old enough to start making retirement withdrawals. The new rules will allow other savers to make conversions, if their plan is set up to accommodate them.
While the move may be applauded by investors who will get extra say in how they save for retirement, it’s also a quick-fix revenue generator for the government. Account holders who convert traditional retirement accounts into Roth IRAs have to pay taxes on their balances when they convert – taxes they would otherwise be deferring. A new wave of conversions could spell a revenue windfall for Uncle Sam, although of course it would lower tax receipts in the future.
From Wall St. Journal:
"Roth conversions for retirement plans. Under current law, a deferral plan under section 401(k) (including the Thrift Savings Plan), 403(b) or 457(b) governmental plan can have Roth accounts that allow participants to save on a Roth basis. That is, they can make after-tax contributions to the plan and all the principal and earnings are tax-free when distributed. Plans can currently allow participants to convert their pre-tax accounts to Roth accounts, but only with respect to money they have a right to take out of the plan, usually because they have reached age 59½ or separated from service. This proposal would allow any amount in a non-Roth account to be converted to a Roth account in the same plan, whether or not the amount is distributable. The amount converted would be subject to regular income tax.
This provision is estimated to raise $12.2 billion over ten year."
That's peanuts.
Re Roth conversion.
Sorry to be dense. I don't understand the changed tax consequence. When you convert a tax-deferred account to a Roth, the tax payer incurs an immediate tax liability for the value of the converstion. It has always been so. What is the change that raises taxes.
Second, why would the ordinary convert before he needs to? For equal risk returns, the value of the apperciating asset is larger in the deferred account than it will be after conversion to a Roth. Therefore it appreciates a low amount, but after taxes. Doesn't seem worth it, unless the future withdrawal from the tax deferred acount will occur at a significantly higher rate, something less likely after retirement than while earning in the peak earning years.
Thanks in advance.
Maybe your're thinking about IRA's. Evidently, 401(k) (including the Thrift Savings Plan), 403(b) or 457(b) can't be, until the new law, be converted to a ROTH unless certain conditions apply (see 2:20 message).
Anyone can see that this will lead to very little new income and won't give 5% of the budget.
I don't trust Roth retirement accounts.
If things get bad enough (and they will) the government will announce that even Roth accounts will be taxed (again) by some amount when the money is disbursed for retirement living expenses. You would have to be a fool to believe that they won't as our federal deficit continues to spiral out of control and the Boomers retire with all those fast growing entitlement expenses.
Yep, O'bama wants more of your money to waste.
A realist would reduce goverment and contractor compensation by 3% one time and solve most of the future problem with one, wise dose of financial medicine.
It's coming. 6 -8 days of government shutdown before the debt limit is extended each year accomplishes this "as easy as pie".
Throw in 2-3 years delay in medicare and social security, along with means testing and you're almost there.
3% national VAT for good measure.
The politicians refuse to tell the public the truth because they know that the voters won't accept it:
Taxes will have to go up by 33% and entitlements will have to be cut by 33% if our federal government is to survive the next two decades of the retiring Boomers.
The longer we delay making the hard choices, the larger those two figures will need to be revised upward.
Something that can't go on forever... doesn't.
January 6, 2013 9:19 PM
I hope you are dead wrong on both account. I say lower taxes to a flat 10% , 8% federal, 2% state, do away with all other taxes, do away with ALL tax write offs of any kind or fr any reason, abolish the IRS completely, cut all government waste and spending immediately including R&D and assure SS and Medicare are fully funded and good to go for ALL.
A flat tax like the 13% that Russia uses is great in a developing country that provides no social safety nets (SS, Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, etc).
Here in America that won't work. The US government budget is completely dominated by the expense of our entitlement programs. Most of these programs like Veterans benefits, SS and Medicare are required to be paid out each month to meet government promises. It's mandatory.
If you want to see a flat 10% tax then be prepared to have your future entitlement benefits crushed in the process. Expect to see your private TCP1 pension also destroyed in the economic chaos that follows. It that suits your fancy, well, then by all means go for it. However, the massive social disruptions and riots that result won' be pretty to watch.
Post a Comment