Unemployment Benefits Deal

[smock]

Today, Dems reached an agreement to lower the proposed federal unemployment benefit from $400 to $300 (which is the current level that expires mid-March). But the agreement also extends the extra $300 until October (originally it ended in September). And the compromise will waive federal taxes on the first $10,200 of unemployment benefits.

The tax change is a big deal––it always baffled me that the government taxes unemployment benefits as income in the first place. Only about 40% of people on unemployment had any taxes withheld, so lots of people were going to get a big bill when they file taxes. I wish we could waive income tax on unemployment benefits completely, but this compromise will help a lot of people. (Though, selfishly, I wish I hadn't filed taxes YESTERDAY because I'll have to file an amended return to get an extra refund on Mr. Smock's UI benefits.)

Here's a rundown of the changes:
www.cnbc.com/2021/03/05/unemployment-benefits-deal-to-waive-taxes-on-first-10200-dollars-of-ui.html

So what do we think? Are the extra weeks of coverage worth cutting the UI benefit from $400 to $300? Is there any good reason to tax UI benefits?

[seeyalater52]

I think this is a good deal.

[winecat]

I thought it was $300? (At least that's what we're getting here.)

[mouse]

I’m not sure how I survived the legislating of the ACA because I’m already at the “OMG just pass something already!” stage.

This seems fine? I mean, you always hope for better, but at the end of the day it seems like it will help people who need it. I agree with you on taxes.

[smock]

Mar 5, 2021 14:48:01 GMT -5 winecat said:

I thought it was $300? (At least that's what we're getting here.)

The bill that passed in December was $300 for 11 weeks (and I think there was some ridiculous stunt like Trump not signing it until Sunday so people lost a week of benefits). The $1.9 trillion Dem bill originally proposed to raise that to $400 per week through September. But the new deal will keep the extra UI at $300, except it will last until October instead of expiring this month. So, yeah. It's confusing. 

[icedcoffee]

This seems reasonable. My H will be unemployed at the beginning of April so it's reassuring to know this has been extended to October. Though--my ideal hope is that he finds something before April!

[orval]

I think the $300 is fine. I am getting $500 a week in NC total that includes the $300. I feel like that is a lot of money. My sister in IL gets something like $800 a week that includes the $300.

[smock]

Mar 5, 2021 15:00:35 GMT -5 orval said:

I think the $300 is fine. I am getting $500 a week in NC total that includes the $300. I feel like that is a lot of money. My sister in IL gets something like $800 a week that includes the $300.

This country needs some major unemployment benefits reforms. It's ridiculous how different benefits are from state-to-state. So without the $300 you'd only get $200 a week? That's so little. And don't a lot of states cut off benefits after like 13 weeks?

I understand tying UI benefits to previous earnings and cost of living, but maybe we need a national minimum or something.

[winecat]

smock- When I got laid off from my corporate job ages ago, the max UI benefit was for anyone making what I was making and above. I think that was about $1600/month which was far less than what I was making per month. It was a disaster then and now.

[icedcoffee]

I never understood the time limits on unemployment. No one is living a lavish lifestyle on UI. The max in MD is $430 per week which amounts to $22,360 per year. No one is choosing to live off of that if there's an alternative. And MD's max is 26 weeks. So WTF are you supposed to do if you can't finding anything by then?

[orval]

Mar 5, 2021 15:25:31 GMT -5 smock said:

Mar 5, 2021 15:00:35 GMT -5 orval said:

I think the $300 is fine. I am getting $500 a week in NC total that includes the $300. I feel like that is a lot of money. My sister in IL gets something like $800 a week that includes the $300.

This country needs some major unemployment benefits reforms. It's ridiculous how different benefits are from state-to-state. So without the $300 you'd only get $200 a week? That's so little. And don't a lot of states cut off benefits after like 13 weeks?

I understand tying UI benefits to previous earnings and cost of living, but maybe we need a national minimum or something.

Yes, NC is one of the least generous in benefits.  I got 13 weeks originally, extended to 26 weeks.  Then I got nothing for a couple months.  It came back when the Fed bill passed in Dec.    In IL, my sister started with 39 weeks.  She also got a severance package  but unemployment still pays out.  She reported it and called about it and they said she still qualified.    Thankfully she just accepted a position today!

[sofamonkey]

Would the changes on income tax be for the 2020 tax year, or for 2021?

[imimahoney]

Is that what's holding everything up now?

[wanderingback]

Mar 5, 2021 16:26:52 GMT -5 sofamonkey said:

Would the changes on income tax be for the 2020 tax year, or for 2021?

In the article posted in the OP it says for the 2020 unemployment benefits. 

[wanderingback]

And yeah I didn't know that unemployment benefits were taxed.
My partner got his tax document from them and the amount it says he received is way higher than what he actually received last year.
He went many months without received any payments.
So I'm sure it's all going to be a mess to straighten out.
The process for applying for the benefits is confusion as it is, I'm sure even if the option to have taxes to be withheld is there, it's not made very clear.

[kershnic]

Mar 5, 2021 15:25:31 GMT -5 smock said:

Mar 5, 2021 15:00:35 GMT -5 orval said:

I think the $300 is fine. I am getting $500 a week in NC total that includes the $300. I feel like that is a lot of money. My sister in IL gets something like $800 a week that includes the $300.

This country needs some major unemployment benefits reforms. It's ridiculous how different benefits are from state-to-state. So without the $300 you'd only get $200 a week? That's so little. And don't a lot of states cut off benefits after like 13 weeks?

I understand tying UI benefits to previous earnings and cost of living, but maybe we need a national minimum or something.

My MIL lives in Wisconsin and earned around 100k/year before she got laid off last year. In a health care field, by the way. She is receiving around $500/week in unemployment INCLUDING the federal extra. She was close to retirement and FIL works so they’re fine, but I cannot imagine the devastation that people in her situation who don’t have back up options must be feeling.

[kershnic]

I think this is a good change and have no issue with Democrats supporting it.

[af1212]

Mar 5, 2021 15:25:31 GMT -5 smock said:

Mar 5, 2021 15:00:35 GMT -5 orval said:

I think the $300 is fine. I am getting $500 a week in NC total that includes the $300. I feel like that is a lot of money. My sister in IL gets something like $800 a week that includes the $300.

This country needs some major unemployment benefits reforms. It's ridiculous how different benefits are from state-to-state. So without the $300 you'd only get $200 a week? That's so little. And don't a lot of states cut off benefits after like 13 weeks?

I understand tying UI benefits to previous earnings and cost of living, but maybe we need a national minimum or something.

And over here I made “too little” to qualify for unemployment when I lost my job last March 😩. How can someone who makes “too little” be better off with nothing!

[Mushe]

Thanks for posting! I was just chatting with a friend who had a surprise tax Bill this year for her 2020 supplemental UIB. She had taxes withheld from the base, but she only worked PT, and the $600 especially was double what she was getting from regular benefits. They are in a privileged position and grateful that they can pay it, but this is definitely a nice benefit.

It certainly seems worth it to me, to extend another month and have the tax benefit.