Payroll Tax Cut To Boost Take-Home Pay For Most Workers

Comment   Email   Print
Related Articles
WASHINGTON — The Internal Revenue Service today released instructions to help employers implement the 2011 cut in payroll taxes, along with new income-tax withholding tables that employers will use during 2011.

Millions of workers will see their take-home pay rise during 2011 because the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act Of 2010 provides a two percentage point payroll tax cut for employees, reducing their Social Security tax withholding rate from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent of wages paid. This reduced Social Security withholding will have no effect on the employee’s future Social Security benefits.

The new law also maintains the income-tax rates that have been in effect in recent years.

Employers should start using the new withholding tables and reducing the amount of Social Security tax withheld as soon as possible in 2011 but not later than Jan. 31, 2011. Notice 1036, released today, contains the percentage method income tax withholding tables, the lower Social Security withholding rate, and related information that most employers need to implement these changes. Publication 15, (Circular E), Employer’s Tax Guide, containing the extensive wage bracket tables that some employers use, will be available on in a few days.

The IRS recognizes that the late enactment of these changes makes it difficult for many employers to quickly update their withholding systems. For that reason, the agency asks employers to adjust their payroll systems as soon as possible, but not later than Jan. 31, 2011.

For any Social Security tax over withheld during January, employers should make an offsetting adjustment in workers’ pay as soon as possible but not later than March 31, 2011.

Employers and payroll companies will handle the withholding changes, so workers typically won’t need to take any additional action, such as filling out a new W-4 withholding form.

As always, however, the IRS urges workers to review their withholding every year and, if necessary, fill out a new W-4 and give it to their employer. For example, individuals and couples with multiple jobs, people who are having children, getting married, getting divorced or buying a home, and those who typically wind up with a balance due or large refund at the end of the year may want to consider submitting revised W-4 forms. Publication 919, How Do I Adjust My Tax Withholding?, provides more information to workers on making changes to their tax withholding.
Read more from:
Comment   Email   Print
Members Opinions:
December 17, 2010 at 4:26pm
Just remember that whatever extra you bring home during the year, you will be taxed on at the end of the year.

For example: If you bring home an extra $14.60 a week because of this law, which totals $759.20 a year for 52 pay periods, your refund the following year will be reduced by that same amount.

Don't let the law fool you, because you don't actually save any money at all, you just have more to spend each week but the government will get it all back the following year when you file your taxes.

It is an incentive to help you spend money in an affort to help the economy grow. I personally like the extra money, but this has been going on for some time and I don't really think it is helping to grow anything. Maybe maintain a little, but I don't see growth because of it.

Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong on this, but I am almost certain that is correct.
December 17, 2010 at 7:39pm
"your refund the following year will be reduced by that same amount."... "government will get it all back the following year"... "I am almost certain that is correct"...

doolittle, better start reading some different books and manuals other than those on the Civil War if you are going to come off with any credability on this.

I recall that VY got a 7 on the Wonderlic.....just wondering???

December 17, 2010 at 7:48pm
dailyreader, can you supply information that what doolittlerd77 says is inaccurate. If not, why the gibberish?
December 18, 2010 at 5:24am
Mr Halpren: The 2% reduction in SS deduction is treated like regular income and you will be taxed on it at the rate you would normally be at that income level. To say your refund will be reduced by that amount and the government gets it will get it all back the next year shows a fundamental basic misunderstanding of not only the reason for the reduction but also of the IRS tax structure.

If one cannot do a simple 1040 at year end you wonder about that Wonderlic score.

Granted the reduction seems at odds with what SS is facing down the road as is a number of other incentives for this trillion dollar stimulus package and also granted that we, if we are still alive, will not only pay this 2% break back but the other 14 trillion we owe but this 2% would not be paid back at year's end by a reduction in your refund, if you have one coming..

Gibberish--it all is, particularly what the government is doing now in view of the debt and SS future.
December 18, 2010 at 6:51am
Kevin you can give it up man because these two are intent on being argumentative and childish.

It was a simple statement that neither one could understand or refute and one in which they could find nothing to say but an attempt at sarcasm using a football Wonderlic test and some mundane reference to an article in which goober got destroyed during a feeble attempt at trying to sound like he knew history.

goober I hope you don't ever to choose to run for political office in which you would be required to be responsible for other people's money. I don't think we would have to worry about you getting elected anyway, so I guess it really doesn't matter.

dailyreader I expect nothing less than your continued pathetic attempts at humor and bickering because you are nothing more than a pitiful old man who lives in his own little world with no one to listen to him but the other personalities that possess his mind.

Sorry you two can't keep up. Keep trying though; you might get there someday.

And to all of you, who read this, understand that last week when we actually had a debate about an article these two intertwined, star crossed cronies suddenly went silent.

Watch them as their intent on bickering, sarcasm and arguing unfolds when they can't find anything else to say. It becomes quite comical.
December 18, 2010 at 7:46am
All I want to know is am I better off keeping the amount withhold as it is, or accept this gift from the government. I will consult with my employer to determine if there are strings attached, and his recommendation.
December 18, 2010 at 9:45am
This 2 percent cut is an opportunity for Americans to prove that they are responsible and will invest it in a retirement fund. So don't forget to show some personal responsibility and invest your 2 percent tax break in the stock market.
December 18, 2010 at 11:02am
You have to count on good old dailyreader to completely get it wrong on everything he is saying and of course this is no different. I am surprised he actually knew what a Wonderlic test was; I figured he thought it had something to do with a lollipop.

Anyway he tries to spin this; you will still be taxed on your earned income for the year. And there is absolutely no debate on that at all. So if you bring home an extra $759.20 during the year like I said in the first comment your overall tax refund will be reduced by that amount at the end of that year. The government is allowing you to borrow money from your future refund by giving it to you weekly in an attempt to stimulate the economy.

Anyone who thinks they are giving you anything without expecting something in return is as naive as dailyreader.

This was done a few years back when we all got the checks for $400.00 for a single deduction and $800.00 for a couple. It was nothing more than a way to borrow from the yearend tax refund. That is why your refund the following year was reduced by that amount.

dailyreader can attempt to try and impress you all with his sarcasm, numbers and general overkill of the facts, but instead of listening to his nonsense I would suggest you do as Kevin has said and consult your employer and a tax representative who actually knows the law and how it will affect your refund.
December 18, 2010 at 11:28am
If it is just more living for today and paying for it tomorrow, I think I will pass. That's one of the reasons we've ended up $13 trillion on debt.
December 18, 2010 at 11:42am
Dollittle, if what you are saying is true, then it is a way to take social security money and shift it to general tax. If daily reader is correct, we should increase our 401K by 2 percent or add to or start an IRA ( Roth IRA is after tax ) considering we have the lowest tax in 60 years and lots of debt, and an underfunded social security program, I would think taxes will go up in the future so a Roth IRA would be the best option.
December 18, 2010 at 11:53am
Mr Halpren: If you are making $100,000/yr, you will see $2,000 more disposable income dollars. Your gross will not have changed. And since SS contributions are not deductible to begin with--the tax rate at year's end will not have changed.

All we have done is short the SS fund of that money, sorely needed in the future, and given you an opportunity to spend $2,000 around the square, stimulating the economy and hopefully adding a few more jobs.

Not much different than any stimulus program except this time it shorts the SS fund..

If, as a fiscal conservative, one decries stimulus money that runs up the deficit, then one should be quite aghast at this stimulus program that brings the day of reckoning even closer for SS.

As Dork said, best take that 2000 and max out IRA or 401 if you have not already done so, perhaps in an index fund--next year may see a return of 14,000.

December 18, 2010 at 2:40pm
No matter how you look at it, if you make $100,000 you will still be taxed at the $100,000 rate at the end of the tax year. It is earned income. Period. You can't change that no matter what you call it. Incentive, tax cut, disposable income, Job Creations Act, Making Work Pay Act, etc. etc., etc.

Just because you see an extra $2000 during the year does not mean you won't get taxed on it at the end of the year.

It only means that during the 52 week pay period you are being taxed on $98,000 instead of the $100,000 you would normally be taxed on.

At the end of the year you still have to claim the entire $1000,000 as taxable income, which means the government will still get exactly what they were going to get all along.

It is nothing more than a law that allows you to borrow against what you make in an effort to try and stimulate the economy.

How you choose to invest it, spend it, or save it is entirely up to you. Do I like having the extra $2000 in my pocket during the year? Sure I do. Who wouldn't?

Do I think it is doing anything to stimulate the economy? No I don't. The Jobs Creation Act was put into affect in 2004 and we all see where our economy is right now.

As far as Social Security goes, I had much rather be allowed to invest 2% to 3% of the money I am taxed each week because I would get a much better rate of return and actually have something on the day I retire.

dailyreader I have no faith in seeing a dime of the money I currently give towards Socical Security, so what is being done to it now will have no affect on me in the future.

And just to be perfectly clear, a true tax cut or tax relief is something you never, ever, in any way have to pay back.

Everything else is smoke and mirrors and nothing but a loan.
December 18, 2010 at 5:24pm
didnt go silent - just tired of arguing with a fool

only thing you destroy is your credibility
December 19, 2010 at 5:49am
dork, this $1,000 walk around money doolittle will have in his pocket next year goes back to what you said about China. The SS fund will be short billions, the government won't have those billions to get out on IOUs and will need to borrow more from China, increasing our trillions of dollars already owed.

Hastening the day when we will truckle (hope you have not worn out your dictionary by now, doolittle) to them.

Been six or more decades since I used those chop sticks I brought back but maybe time to get adept again and heat up that huangjiu.
December 19, 2010 at 6:29am
Just wondering are you two brothers' goober & dailyreader?

And I love it when both of you prove me right.

When neither of you have anything to say about a subject that actually makes sense and stays on topic or can't refute what is true with your lies, made up so-called "facts" or some obscure quote or word you spend hours researching on the internet you both resort to name calling.

I believe I correctly predicted what would happen up above in my 2nd comment.

How easy it is to profile the intelligence level of one old man with no one to listen to him and one man who wishes he could be part of an intelligent conversation, but just can't seem to find anything intelligent to say.

And just so you know dailyreader, you "truckle" every single time I choose to make you.
December 19, 2010 at 7:40am

These are very interesting comments. Everyone on who has commented think the SS cut is a bad idea and find it difficult to argue with someone from the opposite party.

Social Security went bust last year because of the Making Work Pay tax credit in the Stimulus package. Obama got to claim that he gave 95% of working Americans an eight buck a week tax cut, but we had to borrow $39 billion from China to keep Social Security checks going out. This makes the problem even worse.

Dork, our total tax burden is higher than ever, it is a lie to say it is lower than the last 60 years. All one needs to do is look at payroll tax increases over the past 60 years and add that to income taxes to prove it is a lie.

Doolittle, you don't pay income tax on FICA, so decreasing FICA taxes and increasing earned income means you will pay a little extra, but not the full 2%.

The 2004 tax pre-funds didn't rob the SS tax like this one does.

Daily and Doolittle, you guys agree on this one, but can't get past the partisan bickering.
December 19, 2010 at 12:37pm
I do believe it was you who made the first comment about me goober in this particular article and I do believe it was you goober who called me a fool, not me that insulted you.

Once again you stray off subject and can't even follow your own thought process. Typical.
December 19, 2010 at 12:57pm
JohnnyRingo, if you read my first comment you would see that I was more than happy to be corrected and simply asked people to let me know what they thought about the article.

But, as usual dailyreader and his protege goober chose to act like two five year olds in kindergarten instead of adults who speak intelligently. Both chose sarcasm and attempts at cut-downs instead of actual comments that pertained to the article.

I never ask for the ignorance they bring to the table, but I am more than happy to let them show their idiocy because they can't understand anything else.

And no goober; the eligible(not illegible as you wrote, which is not even a word)age to draw s.s. did not go up recently. It was proposed by the Obama Deficit Commission to be raised to 68 forty years from now and to age 69 sixty five years from now but it did not receive the required 14 votes to pass.

It is currently at 67 years in order to receive 100%.
December 19, 2010 at 2:59pm
illegible-not clear enough to be read : his handwriting is totally illegible. "these two are intent on being argumentative and childish"
December 19, 2010 at 4:44pm
In the context that you wrote it in, it is not a word you would use.

Go back and read what you wrote goober.

What you wrote according to your definition is: Didn't the illegible (not clear enough to read) age to draw ss go up again recently?

You see what I am saying now? I know it is hard sometimes to follow what you mean to say vs. what you really write, but you would think you would get it even if no one else did.
December 20, 2010 at 5:39am
"I never ask for the ignorance they bring to the table"

doolittle, with all kindness and love I can muster in my heart this Christmas week for you, it seems like it is your table and you are doing the serving.

Happy Holidays

December 20, 2010 at 5:56am
Postscript to doolittle: Total lunar eclipse tonight, you might want to stay inside to keep from hastening your derangement.

From the Jackson Sun:

"From Earth, people see the entire moon move through the darkest part of Earth's shadow — when shut off from the light of the sun, the moon often takes on an eerie red or orange color, with occasional shades of blue or gray, he said.

Tonight will begin with a big, bright full moon, and by 12:32 a.m., the moon will begin to darken on the left side. The shadow will spread until it nearly covers the moon, according to a news release from the Pink Palace Museum.

At 1:41 a.m., the moon will totally enter Earth's shadow, Maness said.

"You would think it would be totally dark, and some are totally dark," he said. "The moon can be very hard to see. But there is a little bit of light that curves around the Earth that will reflect off so we can see the edges."

Unlike a solar eclipse, which can last just a few minutes, this lunar eclipse will last for about one hour and 12 minutes, ending at 2:53 a.m., Maness said. Another difference between solar and lunar eclipse: a lunar eclipse is perfectly safe"

Don't know about that "safe" comment, particularly if one is already affected up there.
December 20, 2010 at 8:24am
written by do77 "(not illegible as you wrote, which is not even a word)" Then written by do 77 after seeing his misquote "In the context that you wrote it in, it is not a word you would use."
December 20, 2010 at 8:43am
I see one of your other personalities came out in between the two posts there dailyreader.

They have medication and doctors who can help you. Although the first step would be to understand you have a problem and I see no chance of you ever figuring that out.

Too many different people roaming around in that head of yours to ever allow one of them to dominate long enough to actually go get the medication you need.

I really think LEGION would be a better pen name for you instead of dailyreader. Because there are many of you after all.

Good luck with it and Merry CHRISTmas to all of your personalities. Please give them all my best.
December 20, 2010 at 12:35pm
I definitely believe that dailyreader and goober are one in the same.

No two people could write the exact same way, make as little sense and start typing in the middle of their thought process unless they were one person.

I swear the dailyreader/goober split personalities are getting worse by the day.

When you read them it is like one is fighting the other for control and neither one is winning.

Give it up goober/dailyreader/Legion and try taking a clozapine or a olanzapine to help yourself focus into one person instead of the many different people you have become.

December 21, 2010 at 4:01am
Doolittlerd is right i have a friend whom almost had to pay in money last year because her place of business changed her tax withholding information. Her accountant told her that it was because of the new law and that if you choose to get more back during the year you are taxed more at the end of the year.
December 28, 2010 at 8:31am
Pretty easy to see why Capt. Kirk wanted Scottie to beam him up.
December 28, 2010 at 9:02am
I will change it for you, just so you understand.

You are woefully uneducated in basic history to the point you make yourself look ludicrous (the one word you know the meaning of) when you speak.

I am thankful that the people recognized that before I did.

And you can figure out the meaning of that statement on your own.
Powered by Bondware
News Publishing Software

The browser you are using is outdated!

You may not be getting all you can out of your browsing experience
and may be open to security risks!

Consider upgrading to the latest version of your browser or choose on below: