 |
| Adoption Law | Child Custody | Child Support | Divorce Law | Family Law | Marriage Law |
Administrative OffsetThe process of withholding all, or part, of administrative payments (any non-tax related payment) that is paid by the Federal government to a person or entity that owes an outstanding delinquent non-tax debt to the government, and applying the funds to reduce or satisfy the debt. Question: what does social security offset? I filed for social security benefits back in 2006.
Got turned down twice,filed an appeal,went in front of ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE,was just approved and received letter.
Just waiting for them to calculate back moneys they owe me and future monthly payments.
Bot while all this was going on,i was on workers comp in NJ off and on from 2004-07.
Now i hear they do offsets if you owe anything,like child support,taxes and COMP!
My question is,how does that work?
Are they taking ALL of my back benefits to do offset or is it just prorated or what?
Im expecting at least 30,000 in back money,less my attorneys 25%.
I cant see them taking every bit of it!
Theres no pensions involved.
Question: Will i get my tax refund? I'm worried!? My husband was ordered to pay child support for a kid that is not his, and he cant afford to pay so he is appealing, well he got a letter today saying that he is in arrears and his debt has been submitted for administrative offset and/or tax refund offset, and if he doesnt pay in 30 days the account will be referred for offset. However, i called the offset program call center and there are no debts listed, and when i check the wheres my refund status it says our refund is being processed and we should recieve it by may 25th. So are we ok? I'm panicking about this!
Question: I need to know if I can say this to my boss. (Long... sorry).? I work for an architecture firm. In the last year, things have been very slow. I survived a round of layoffs, and a "demotion" from accounting assistant to the same job plus taking over the former administrative assistant's duties. I spoke with my boss at that time about my feeling that I had been demoted, and that I needed to consider how working somewhere for 4 years and being put back at the front desk might look to other potential employers someday. She understood, and we were on good terms.
Now, we've opened a satellite office. The drive is dangerous to and from, and adds 3 hours onto my overall travel time on the 3 days per week I work there. Because of the driving, and my continued flexibility, I requested that since I'm an hourly employee, I take half days off on Friday afternoons to offset the unapproved overtime. This was grudgingly granted.
Now, the administrative worker who covers the front desk while I am at the satellite office wants me to consider taking Friday mornings off, so she can travel the two hours home to see her family. I already asked for Friday afternoons off because my own father, who lives six hours away, has cancer. I like the flexibility of seeing him earlier than 11:00 PM when I go home on the weekends.
Can I tell my boss that while I AM willing to occasionally cover the front desk shift Friday afternoons, I feel that it is unfair to take away what schedule we'd agreed to? I feel that if I am expected to make a dangerous drive 3 days a week, without additional compensation or increased responsibilities, that I might as well quit and work someplace where I don't have the dangerous driving and the constant bitching about my schedule.
Let me clarify... we've worked it out so that one of the two hours of drive time is included in the day's work.
As for "dangerous" vs. long... well, I drive two hours round-trip every day, through a mountain pass, in 6+" of show, while dodging semis, mountain goats, deer, elk, and bighorn sheep. It is the road with the highest number of fatalities annually in our state. I have every right to complain.
Question: Is It True Republicans Support Crime??? Why did John McCain not vote for the Biden Amdt. No. 529 (this was vote #110)?
This amendment would increase funding for the COPS program to $1.15 billion for FY2008 to provide state and local law enforcement with critical resources necessary to prevent and respond to violent crime and acts of terrorism and is offset by an unallocated reduction to non-defense discretionary spending and/or reduction to administrative expenses.
On this same day he voted yes on vote # 109, which was the DeMint Amdt. No. 528. This was to repeal the death tax. He voted yes on vote #111, which was the Bunning Amdt. No. 594. This was to provide a deficit-neutral reserve fund for protecting State flexibility in Medicaid.
Vote 109 occurred at 1:13 PM, vote 110 occurred at 1:32 PM, vote 111 occurred at 1:52 PM. Why would he miss vote 110?
This can be found in The Real McCain (page 28), which was written by Cliff Schecter
Question: Should we borrow more money from foreign countries inorder to cut taxes? We are so in debt to China and many other countries. The last 8 years has cost Americans their lifestyle including many are loosing their homes and their jobs. While non/low tax paying
(due to loop holes and Bush tax cuts) CEO's of many corporations receive bonuses of $60 million.
"I'm not in favor of financing tax cuts with borrowed money," Greenspan said during an interview with Bloomberg Television. "I always have tied tax cuts to spending."
McCain has said that he would offset his proposed cuts — including reducing the corporate tax rate and eliminating the Alternative Minimum Tax that has plagued middle-class families — by ending congressional pork-barrel spending, unnecessary government programs and overhauling entitlement programs such as Medicare and Social Security.
Democrats pounced on Greenspan's comments, in part because McCain professed last year that he was weaker on economics than foreign affairs and was reading Greenspan's memoir, "The Age of Turbulence," to educate himself.
"Obviously he needs to go back to that book and study it some more," Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said during a conference call arranged by the campaign of Democratic nominee Barack Obama.
McCaskill said eliminating congressional earmark spending — estimated at $17 billion annually — cannot offset McCain's proposed tax cuts.
"That's a huge amount of money, but it's not even a drop in the bucket to pay for $3.5 trillion in tax cuts," she said. "So, every time he throws up earmarks and he's asked how he's going to pay for it, he knows he's being disingenuous, he knows he's not being forthcoming."
McCain campaign officials dispute the $3.3 trillion figure, saying it assumes eliminating 2003 tax cuts made by the Bush administration and then cutting from that higher level. They say McCain is proposing tax cuts worth $600 billion from current levels.
"John McCain opposed President Bush's tax cuts in 2003, because they didn't include the necessary spending controls. Sen. McCain's proposed job-growing tax cuts are modest in comparison to his plans to slow the exploding growth of federal expenditures — meaning that contrary to Chairman Greenspan's assertions, this relief isn't proposed on borrowed money," said McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds.
While McCain opposed the 2003 cuts and previous Bush administration tax cuts from 2001, he now says he would leave them intact. Obama has said he would repeal Bush tax cuts benefiting families making over $250,000 annually to pay for programs and provide middle-tax class relief.
Meanwhile, organizers of a conservative summit in Washington said McCain and his running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, missed an opportunity by not addressing the gathering. Some 2,100 activists from 44 states, plus another 10,000 people who signed up to watch online, participated in the three-day Values Voter Summit.
On Saturday, McCain was less than 10 miles away, working in at his campaign headquarters in Arlington, Va. Palin was leaving Alaska and traveling to a rally in Reno, Nev. Last year, McCain and seven other GOP presidential candidates spoke at the summit.
"I think there is some disappointment that he's not here. I think there's greater disappointment that Palin is not here," said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, a key sponsor of the summit. "I think people would have liked to have heard from her."
Activists attending the summit were unanimous in their enthusiasm for Palin, including several who said their support for McCain was lukewarm before he selected her.
Gary Ward, pastor of the Rocky Point Church in Stephenville, Texas, said he supported former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee for the GOP nomination but that his enthusiasm for McCain has been increased by his choice of Palin and his recent statement that he believes life begins at conception.
"That was absolutely the right answer," Ward said.
Elizabeth Kish, an administrative assistant from Gainesville, Fla., said she was put off by McCain's record on immigration and was considering voting for Libertarian Party candidate Bob Barr until Palin's selection.
"Once he chose Palin that was it for me," said Kish, who was wearing a "Pro-Life Pro-Palin" button and another button featuring pictures of Chief Justice John Roberts and Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito under the slogan, "The Kind of Change I Believe In."
___
Associated Press writer Joan Lowy contributed to this report.
Question: Why did John McCain not vote for the Biden Amdt. No. 529 (this was vote #110)? This amendment would increase funding for the COPS program to $1.15 billion for FY2008 to provide state and local law enforcement with critical resources necessary to prevent and respond to violent crime and acts of terrorism and is offset by an unallocated reduction to non-defense discretionary spending and/or reduction to administrative expenses.
On this same day he voted yes on vote # 109, which was the DeMint Amdt. No. 528. This was to repeal the death tax. He voted yes on vote #111, which was the Bunning Amdt. No. 594. This was to provide a deficit-neutral reserve fund for protecting State flexibility in Medicaid.
Vote 109 occurred at 1:13 PM, vote 110 occurred at 1:32 PM, vote 111 occurred at 1:52 PM. Why would he miss vote 110?
This can be found in The Real McCain (page 28), which was written by Cliff Schecter.
Question: what do you think my chances of getting disability are?? i have a club foot where i cant bend my ankle ....also i cannot feel from my knee down........i can only bend my knee in the shape of an L and no further.....i have a condition called ossification in my hip where i cannot bend my leg foward and barely back....i have leg length discrepancy....and my tailbone is offset where i cannot sit up straight....im in alot of chronic pain but cannot afford pain management and i have no insurance.....i have a colostomy ....and brain damage according to m.r.i. in my frontal lobe.....i use a cane to walk as i fall alot and it hurts......i have terrible neck and back , leg pelvic pains....terrible short term memory....i cannot put my shoes and socks on nor can i drive okay but i was in a car wreck june 30th of 2006 and aqquired all this and i think im about the best of my recovery im going to get ......is that more believealbe......or the fact that ive allready been denied twice more believable im in the administrative law judge stage and have to use a free clinin doctors to support my case in my later condition i was in a coma for about a month......also i am 1.2 million dollars in medical debt for not having insurance the car owners insurance would only pay 25k maximum policy ive had everything taken away from me and now have to live at my grandparents im 23 and they provide everything for me as they have for nearly 2 years now.........i really need this disability to get my life back on track
Question: we have a lawywer but from your experience or knowledge what are the changes of him being approved? my boyfriend was in a car wreck about two years ago and he is now at the Administrative Law Judge hearing. His condition is about the best it is going to improve in my eyes. We see a 5$ doctor at a walk in clinic cause there is no insurance. He has a colostomy. His ankle is in a fixed L position due to having a tendon lengthening surgery for drop foot. He has muscle loss in his calf and can only bend at the knee in an L shape. His hip is a little different cause it completely shattered out through the back and they fused pieces of bone to make a hip socket. His coccyx or tailbone is offset about 1 1/2 inch to the right which makes it where he cannot sit up straight and it causes him severe pain. He walks with a cane due to leg length discrepancy meaning one leg is now 2 inches longer than the other. He is in constant pain an we cannot afford pain management so we get the bare minimum help from the 5$ doctor. He cannot bend his hip. His knee and ankle pop with every step. also
he had two mini strokes and has damage to his frontal lobe and left ventricle .......his ability for rational thought I MUST SAY IS GONE. but he is still there behind all the scars. When he moves his head to the right or turns it that way he complains of a sharp pain shooting clear down his spine. This is a new problem since around new years. He has only done factory work and is 23 ...He has to lie down most the time to alleviate the pressure off his lower back. I really dont think he is just playing around i genuinely believe he is hurting and cannot go back to work even at a sit down job. his lawyer says its going to be a hard case to win........I dont understand why....our small family has gone through alot this past 3 years with him being in a coma and only having a 10% chance of survival........I would just like to know that he will be approved cause we have lost alot and would like to get our life together back on track.......he is a great man ......just terribly unlucky..
DRUNK DRIVERS DESERVE AUTOMATIC 5 YRS IN PRISON FOR ATTEMPTED MURDER REGARDLESS IF THEY WERE IN AN ACCIDENT OR NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ALSO we cant afford any behaivoral health but i fear he has post traumatic stress and is really really depressed ........he just doesnt smile and laugh like he used to .......he gets frustrated easily........his rehab is over so this is the best he gets physically...........the 1.2 million dollar bill for all this isnt going anywhere .....he is able to get up and move but he really only leaves the house maybe twice a month now and thats just for a little excersise like grocery shopping which i have to assist in ........he is terrified of riding in a vehicle and cannot drive...........i have to wash his foot for him when he bathes and put on his socks and shoes cause he cannot.............HOW IS HE NOT DISABLED THOUGH????????
Question: If Obamacare is a good idea....why does Obama LIE so much about it (Top 5 LIES liberals try to hide)? Lie One: No one will be compelled to buy coverage.
During the campaign, Obama insisted that he would not resort to an individual mandate to achieve universal coverage. In fact, he repeatedly ripped Hillary Clinton's plan for proposing one. "To force people to buy coverage," he insisted, "you've got to have a very harsh penalty." What will this penalty be, he demanded? "Are you going to garnish their wages?" he asked Hillary in one debate.
Yet now, Obama is behaving as if he said never a hostile word about the mandate. Earlier this month, in a letter to Sens. Max Baucus, D-Mont., and Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., he blithely declared that he was all for "making every American responsible for having health insurance coverage, and making employers share in the cost."
But just like Hillary, he is refusing to say precisely what he will do to those who want to forgo insurance. There is a name for such a health care approach: It is called TonySopranoCare.
Dear Leader Obama believes he's better than the Dear Leader of North Korea it seems. Will America soon regress in the image of NK? Past time to stop this IMO.
Lie Two: No new taxes on employer benefits.
Obama took his Republican rival, Sen. John McCain, to the mat for suggesting that it might be better to remove the existing health care tax break that individuals get on their employer-sponsored coverage, but return the vast bulk--if not all--of the resulting revenues in the form of health care tax credits. This would theoretically have made coverage both more affordable and portable for everyone. Obama, however, would have none of it, portraying this idea simply as the removal of a tax break. "For the first time in history, he wants to tax your health benefits," he thundered. "Apparently, Sen. McCain doesn't think it's enough that your health premiums have doubled. He thinks you should have to pay taxes on them too."
Yet now Obama is signaling his willingness to go along with a far worse scheme to tax employer-sponsored benefits to fund the $1.6 trillion or so it will cost to provide universal coverage. Contrary to Obama's allegations, McCain's plan did not ultimately entail a net tax increase because he intended to return to individuals whatever money was raised by scrapping the tax deduction. Not so with Obama. He apparently told Sen. Baucus that he would consider the senator's plan for rolling back the tax exclusion that expensive, Cadillac-style employer-sponsored plans enjoy, in order to pay for universal coverage. But, unlike McCain, he has said nothing about putting offsetting deductions or credits in the hands of individuals.
In other words, Obama might well end up doing what McCain never set out to do: Impose a net tax increase on health benefits for the first time in history.
Lie Three: Government can control rising health care costs better than the private sector.
Ignoring the reality that Medicare--the government-funded program for the elderly--has put the country on the path to fiscal ruin, Obama wants to model a government insurance plan--the so-called "public option"--after Medicare in order to control the country's rising health care costs. Why? Because, he repeatedly claims, Medicare has far lower administrative costs and overhead than private plans--to wit, 3% for Medicare compared to 10% to 20% for private plans. Hence, he says, subjecting private plans to competition against an entity delivering such superior efficiency will release health care dollars for universal coverage.
But lower administrative costs do not necessarily mean greater efficiency. Indeed, the Congressional Budget Office analysis last year chastised Medicare's lax attitude on this front. "The traditional fee-for-service Medicare program does relatively little to manage benefits, which tends to reduce its administrative costs but may raise its overall spending relative to a more tightly managed approach," it noted on page 93.
In short, extending the Medicare model will further ruin--not improve--even the functioning aspects of private plans.
Lie Four: A public plan won't be a Trojan horse for a single-payer monopoly.
Obama has repeatedly claimed that forcing private plans to compete with a public plan will simply "keep them honest" and give patients more options--not lead to a full-blown, Canadian-style, single-payer monopoly. As I argued in my previous column, this is wishful thinking given that government programs such as Medicare have a history of controlling costs by underpaying providers, who make up the losses by charging private plans more. Any public plan modeled after Medicare will greatly increase this forced subsidy, eventually driving private plans out of business, even if that weren't Obama's intention.
But, as it turns out, it very much is his intention. Before he decided to run for office--and even during the initial days of his campaign--Obama repeatedly said that he was in favor of a single-payer system. What's mo
Question: can past due child support be taken out of social security disability? I recently was determined to be disabled by S.S.A. I. I am expecting a settelment.I recentley recevied a letter from office of child support enforcement.(offset coordinator) the united states dept of the theasury administrative offset and/or federal tax refund offset.said they would take my tax return for past due support.can they take s.s.a. disability payments from me for past due child support.
|
|||||||
