Categories
Health

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act Is Causing Single Mothers to Face Unforeseen Tax Hikes


“Hello, single mother of two kids, here. My taxes went up significantly, meaning that I will not be able to do many of the things that matter to me and my family. But Happy Gaslighting Day to you, too, @GOP,” tweeted Asha Rangappa, a senior lecturer at Yale. The tweet was a reference to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), the sweeping Republican-backed tax plan Trump signed into law in December 2017. With her declaration came a chorus of single mothers who had also experienced an unexpected increase in their annual taxes. One woman responded with “Exactly the same. Single mom of two, huge surge in taxes—like up $10k from what I paid last year. Hello, more consumer debt 2019. Owning the libs by hobbling the middle class. Good times, @GOP.” Another shared, “Single mom of 3 kids making under $60k & I owe for first time ever! #goptaxscam.”

For some mothers, and single mothers in particular, it seems, the increase came as a huge shock. Not just because most hadn’t expected it, but because Donald Trump—with the Republican Party behind him—has promised for months that the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act would provide massive tax cuts to Americans nationwide. So much so that Trump tweeted, “The Tax Cuts are so large and so meaningful, and yet the Fake News is working overtime to follow the lead of their friends, the defeated Dems, and only demean. This is truly a case where the results will speak for themselves, starting very soon. Jobs, Jobs, Jobs!”

When Tax Day rolled around, the results did speak for themselves. But not as Trump expected. “Tax time is usually a time of relief for me,” says Elizabeth, a chemist and single mom in Tulsa, Oklahoma, who asked that Glamour not use her last name. “I have always gotten a much-needed refund of $2,000 to $3,000. This has allowed me to pay unpaid medical bills and get my daughter necessary items like new clothes, since she still grows out of everything each season.” But this week Elizabeth discovered she owed money to the government. She had to fork over $168 in federal taxes. She’s quick to point out that $168 is not a lot, in the grand scheme, but given that she expected to get a refund during tax season, it’s a major hit.

Kat Stratford, a structural engineer and mother of one in Richmond, Virginia, had a similar experience. Stratford typically pays approximately $20,000 in taxes each year, but says this year she was required to pay an additional $8,000. Since she’d been budgeting only for her usual $20,000 amount, Stratford was completely blindsided by the increase. To pay the difference she had to dig into funds set aside to take her child on a vacation. While she says she feels fortunate she had to sacrifice only a discretionary trip, many of her other single mom friends paid a greater cost: “One mom was putting repairs off on her car and hoping to use her federal tax refund to assist in the costly repairs. Another routinely used her refund to pay off credit card debt accumulated over the previous holiday season buying gifts for her kids. This friend now not only owes money to the IRS; she will now go into this coming holiday season in residual credit card debt. Without some relief, it will be devastating and crippling to their families.”

So what exactly happened? According to Kelly Phillips Erb, a tax lawyer and founder of Tax Girl, the problem is twofold. First, the TCJA issued changes that directly impact all parents, single or otherwise. One of them is that the TCJA eliminated personal exemptions—the amount of money you’re allowed to deduct for yourself and dependents (which include your children) on your taxes. “Last year the personal exemption amount was $4,050 per dependent,” Erb says. “So, for example, in my family of five, I had $20,000 in personal exemptions last year, and this year I had none.” Instead of personal exemptions, the TCJA offers increased “standard deductions.” “The updated standard deduction rates are $12,000 for individuals, $18,000 for heads of household, and $24,000. While this sounds like you’re getting an even greater deal, in some cases this amounts to less than when you could file with dependents,” she says.

The other issue impacts Americans across the board. “When the TCJA was passed, they issued a number of changes to the tax code, especially in regard to withholding,” Erb explains. “The withholding tables were wrong for the first quarter of 2018, and even when they were fixed, people didn’t know to account for the new withholding amounts. So ultimately, people weren’t putting enough away to pay their taxes.” A new report predicts that more than 30 million Americans will ultimately owe tax money this year, a huge increase from previous years.





Source link

Categories
Health

Companies That Are Saying 'No' to the Pink Tax


A few years ago, Nitasha Mehta felt like a lot of women did when she realized she was paying more than men for lots of the same personal care products: angry. That’s when, as the head of vendor marketing at Boxed, a wholesale e-tailer offering many of those items, she began digging into her own company’s prices.

“I researched products at Boxed and saw there were pretty significant discrepancies in pricing on things like body wash, shave gel, and deodorant among men’s and women’s products,” Mehta told Glamour.

Even though Boxed was getting its prices from manufacturers, Mehta didn’t just sit on her hands; she took the information to her CEO, Chieh Huang. “He didn’t even know it was an issue […] but he has a young daughter and he didn’t understand why she would have to pay more over her lifetime than her male friends would for certain products,” she said.

Because of that 2016 meeting, Boxed became one of the first retailers to take a strong stand against the Pink Tax. The company adjusted the cost of items like shampoo and razors—products women were paying more for—on a per-ounce or per-unit basis. If men and women were buying the same products, they were going to be spending the same amount.

Given the fact that manufacturers were setting these unfair prices, Boxed became the one absorbing the price difference, and offerings that have been adjusted now bare the #RethinkPink logo on the company’s site. “Our goal in taking a stand was to get people talking about this issue, and even to try to get other companies to follow our lead,” Mehta says.

The Pink Tax, which gets its name from the color most often marketed directly to girls, and which refers to the price difference between products aimed at female consumers versus male consumers, has seemingly been around for decades. Whether it’s for dry cleaning, toys, T-shirts, baby bottles, or haircuts, the Pink Tax has been estimated to cost women thousands of dollars over the course of their lifetime. On top of that, women in 36 states in the U.S. also pay a tax on tampons and pads, even though the products are necessities, and non-essential basics like lip balm aren’t taxed.

The New York City Department of Consumer Affairs published a study in 2015, finding that on average, products for women or girls cost 7 percent more than comparable products for men and boys. This isn’t the first time a study has been done on the Pink Tax, either. The state of California did a study back in 1994 and estimated that women spend $1,350 (that’s roughly $2,304 in today’s dollars) over the course of a year on the Pink Tax.

While women have gotten stuck paying the Pink Tax, they’re also the one’s leading the charge to end it.

“If you look at how many women are CEOs of Fortune 500 companies and pay inequalities, it’s easy to see how this got neglected.” —Sherry Baker, president of marketing and product development for EWC

While Mehta raised her hand to do something about the Pink Tax from within the ranks of her company, former advertising executive Georgina Gooley decided to start her own company to address it. “I was looking at the shaving category, and wondering why a women’s subscription service hadn’t been created, and why women have been an afterthought in the category,” Gooley told Glamour. “Do women not shave? It didn’t make sense.”

After Gooley had this epiphany, she sprung into action. “I knew the Pink Tax existed, but when I discovered that razors and dry cleaners were the worst offenders, I knew I had to do something,” Gooley shared. “That’s when I decided to build a woman’s company to address specifically how women shave.”

Along with co-founder Jason Bravman, Gooley dreamt up Billie, a women’s razor subscription service, and raised $1.5 million in seed funding to start. Billie allows its customers to select the frequency of how often they want deliveries of razor cartridges, and pricing is $9 for four with free delivery. By comparison, another popular mass brand’s cartridges cost $17 for a four-pack.

“We’re more affordable than some men’s razor subscriptions and about half the price of women’s razors in stores,” Gooley says.

Ending the Pink Tax also plays a key role in Billie’s marketing. For instance, the brand offers a “Pink Tax Rebate” to customers so they can share a referral link with friends to earn coupons for Billie so customers can “get some of the money back” they’ve spent on the Pink Tax. “We are unapologetic about being pro-women, and our customers really love that about us,” Gooley says.

Even companies that don’t have a Pink Tax problem themselves are taking on the issue, seeing it as something that matters to its customers. The European Wax Center (or EWC), a chain of hair removal salons around the country, was looking for a focus for a new advertising campaign a little more than a year ago when it honed in on the frustration around the unfair tax.

While the company says it has never charged different prices for the same men’s and women’s services, the majority of its customers are women, as are its employees.

The company launched its #AxThePinkTax campaign in April of this year to advocate for equal pricing for products. The campaign includes a dedicated site where users can discover just how much they’ve lost to the Pink Tax over their lifetime, content for its various social media channels including Snapchat, and the company is making a donation to multiple women-focused charities including Girls In Tech.

[embedded content]

“This hits close to home for us as a company,” Sherry Baker, President of Marketing and Product Development for EWC, told Glamour. “We see examples all of the time. Just recently, a senior executive at EWC who has a baby girl went online to look for a baby bottle, and there is a blue baby bottle and pink baby bottle, and two different prices for the exact same thing. It’s almost hard to believe. That’s why it’s so important to raise awareness.”

As retailers and smaller start-ups have positioned themselves as anti-Pink Tax warriors, they’ve discovered one big thing: it can be good business to do the right thing.

Boxed, who absorbed the cost of the Pink Tax, has made up for it bringing in new customers, it says. And Gooley says Billie has far-exceeded her expectations since its launch in late 2017. “We were totally blown away that we reached our 12-month goal in four-and-a-half months, and we sold out of six of our seven offerings,” Gooley says. The company also picked up another $4 million in funding earlier this year.

The bottom line is, women are sick of paying more and are eager to put their wallets where their mouths are.

“We’ve gotten a lot of responses through social media about it, or our customers read about what we are doing while they are getting their brows done, and they feel good about their association with us,” Baker says of the impact EWC has felt from its anti-Pink Tax campaign.

Still, despite progress, there is no question there is a long way to go. “If you look at the landscape—how many women are CEOs of Fortune 500 companies, inequalities when it comes to pay—it’s easy to see how this got neglected,” Baker says. “This is going to take a long time to fix.”

“Consumers have a big role in holding companies accountable.” —Georgina Gooley, co-founder of Billie

Mehta points to how few companies have followed Boxed’s lead since the company took a stand two years ago. “Tesco [a U.K. chain] has discounted its products, but if you look at retailers in the U.S., not many have been willing to change,” she says.

The women who have been instrumental in leading the charge against the Pink Tax think it will ultimately be up to others raising their voices on this issue to end it. “I’ve seen customers call out companies on Twitter, and the companies haven’t even realized they were doing it, they were pricing according to the market,” Gooley says. “But then the company corrected it. Consumers have a big role in holding companies accountable.”

“I think it’s women taking a stand that’s really going to prompt change,” Mehta shared. “What’s happening is more and more women celebrities are talking about this. Amy Schumer talking about this in a Budweiser commercial was one of the first things that brought this to my attention.”

Now, Mehta is taking her fight on the road, traveling the country as an advocate. She testified in the Colorado House of Representatives and in the Nevada State Assembly in favor of bills repealing the tampon tax. Next, she is heading to Michigan to support a similar bill.

“I’m just getting started,” she says.


Watch the Cost of Being a Woman:



Source link

Categories
Health

The Senate Passed a Major Tax Bill So Hurriedly Some Senators Couldn't Even Read It All


In the early hours of Saturday morning, the U.S. Senate voted on a new, highly contentious tax bill known as the “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.” The $1.5-trillion tax bill is set to give massive tax cuts to corporations and the wealthiest Americans alongside uncertain benefits for the middle class, according to the Washington Post. However, some Democrats are crying foul over the process by which the bill was passed: When amendments to the Republican-led bill surfaced, the information didn’t go directly to the Democratic senators, according to the New York Times. Instead, those senators got wind of changes from K Street lobbyists.

Senators turned to social media to express their anger at how they had to catch wind of changes, the state the 479-page bill was in when they eventually received it, and the fact that they had just a few short hours to read the missive before the vote.

“This is so bad. We have just gotten list of amendments to be included in bill NOT from our R colleagues, but from lobbyists downtown,” Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri tweeted, “None of us have seen this list, but lobbyists have it. Need I say more? Disgusting. And we probably will not even be given time to read them.”

Six hours after her initial tweet, McCaskill posted a photo of a page of the bill, which she and her Democratic colleagues had by then obtained—according to USA Today, major changes were unveiled around 7 P.M. Friday evening. The nearly 500-word text was filled with sometimes-illegible handwritten amendments in the margins.

“I defy any member of the Senate to stand here and take an oath that they have read this and understand what in the world it means to businesses and families and individuals,” Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois said.

McCaskill also tweeted saying that Democratic senators had asked if they could adjourn on Monday so everyone could study the bill, but the request was denied.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts posted a video of herself trying to decipher the handwriting on one of the pages. The Massachusetts Democrat was unable to read everything. “I just want to give you an idea of how the Republican leadership thinks we’re supposed to make laws in the United States Senate,” she said.

Other senators also posted images of the scrawl-filled bill on Twitter, explaining their disappointment in the process.

The bill eventually passed 51 to 49, with a winning margin of one vote (Republican Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee voted against the bill due to concerns over its effect on the deficit). However, the saga isn’t over yet: Because of all the differences between this bill and the version that passed in the House of Representatives about two weeks ago, it’s being sent back to a joint committee, who will “iron out an agreement” between the two versions, according to USA Today. From there, both the House and the Senate will have to vote on identical copies of the bill.

Related Stories:
More Than 11,000 Democratic Women Are Interested in Running for Office So Far This Year
One Muslim Girl on What It’s Like to Live in Trump’s America
This Michigan Politician Might Have Just Created the Best Campaign Ad of All Time





Source link