Thanks for stopping by. Cheers and happy reading,
|the 1940 mystery writer||
All that feline looooove all over the place… had to share it out to the canine side.
Thanks for stopping by. Cheers and happy reading,
#Political link #roundup: What you should understand about the injunction blocking federal amnesty #tcot
There's been a lot of discussion online the last few days about the judicial halt to the president's amnesty plans. Instead of commenting myself (since I'm only a legal assistant, not a lawyer) here's a roundup of links, with the ones I've found most helpful first.
On the actual ruling and what it means
From Townhall.com's Conn Carroll:
5 Key Findings From The Injunction Blocking Obama's Amnesty
From Legal Insurrection's William A. Jacobson, Clinical Professor of Law at Cornell:
Texas Federal Court Enjoins Obama Immigration Executive Action
From The Daily Signal's Josh Siegel:
Q&A: What You Need to Know About Court Order Stopping Obama’s Immigration Actions
From Fox News Insider's Judge Napolitano:
Judge Nap: 'Rare Ruling Against Obama Could Delay Amnesty Forever'
Agreement from Ed Morrissey at HotAir.com:
DHS Secretary: Yeah, we have to put off our executive amnesty for now
From National Review Online's Josh Blackman:
Obama’s ‘Complete Abdication’ of the Law
What happens next?
Back at Legal Insurrection, this time by Amy Miller:
White House hits pause on immigration agenda
From American Thinker's Rick Moran:
Experts say judge's immigration order may be hard for administration to overturn
Those were the articles I found most helpful in understanding this complicated court case. Something did strike me, though, something I haven't seen anyone else discuss.
The lawsuit was originally brought by 17 states, but they've been joined by others. The current total of opposing states is 26. Think about that for a moment. More than half the states in the Union are going toe-to-toe with the federal government. The last time something like this happened, back in 1861, the Union had 34 states and 11 of them seceded — roughly a third of the total. We fought a war over that. If more than half the states oppose the feds… maybe it's time for the feds to back down before something really awful happens *again*.
Still no appeal filed to the 5th Circuit Court. The countdown continues.
This one from PJMedia.com's Hans A. von Spakovsky is a greatest hits collection of lines from the judge's 123-page decision. If you really wish to understand just how powerful the slap-down of the amnesty program was — well, this one's a must-read:
Plain Truth: The Best Lines From the Injunction Halting Executive Amnesty
Thanks for stopping by. Cheers,
Okay, so in January, as a good little publisher, I totaled up all the royalties paid to my authors and prepared to fill out the dreaded 1099MISC forms. In a way it was a good thing, because it’s exciting, watching an author’s royalties rise from year to year, seeing how the company’s doing, all that financial stuff. Satisfying, you know?
Um… no, that’s not the right start. Let’s backtrack a bit.
I’ve known that author royalties above $10 must be reported on a 1099MISC, when almost every other form of income has a threshold of $600. I remember writing nasty notes to my congresscritters, back when I discovered that unsavory little fact. But last year, I let a friend convince me that the royalties bit referred to oil and gas payments, not authors. Authors, she said, should be reported on the line for nonemployee compensation.
It didn’t make any difference, last year when I let myself be led astray. None of my authors (all one of them, at the time) had earned $10 in royalties, much less $600. But I remember feeling a warm little glow over that revelation. The IRS weren’t all that bad; they’d left an out for authors. They understood most authors weren’t earning such amazing amounts that they’d be good plucking for tax money. And I admit, I probably wanted to believe this, which likely made it easier for me to let myself be convinced.
Well, that fantasy bubble just got popped. The royalty threshold for authors really is $10, not $600. This year, to make sure everyone knows that fact, the IRS put it in the instruction manual:
“Report the gross royalties (before reduction for fees, commissions, or expenses) paid by a publisher directly to an author or literary agent…”
Ten bucks. Ten measly little bucks. The IRS, and the big, bad federal government, really is so desperate for every penny that they’ll reach into an author’s pocket for ten bucks.
Sure, I believe in spreading the tax load. The scary financial situation in Connecticut shows what happens when taxes concentrate on the “rich” or even the upper middle class. People who have some skin in the game (e.g., paying for the U.S. government through taxes) tend to take more of an interest in the game itself (the politics and rituals of governing). But ten bucks?
After the fiasco with the 529 college savings plans, maybe I shouldn’t be surprised. They really are starving for pennies in Washington, as Megan McArdle discusses. But at the risk of broken-recording this to death… ten bucks?
Okay, rant over. Thanks for listening and for stopping by. Cheers,