Unemployment Checks

[rpn]

Unemployment checks are in place of wages. I'd tithe it. (Members aren't "expected" to tithe in any particular way, and I'm sure you know that members describe a full tithe a whole lot of different ways. Unless or until their Lord or their bishop tells them to do something different, they can tithe how they think a tithe should be.)

[Tapir Whisperer]

Unemployment insurance is an insurance check paid to you from your paying of the premiums. It is no different than if your home burns down you collecting the insurance monies. Pay tithing on it if you feel the desire.

This is simple. We all know that buying insurance is just another form of gambling. We all know the Church's postition on paying a tithe on earnings from gambling.

[LeSellers]

WRONG, it isn't an insurance, it is a social net entitlement

I find this odd, because the USDeptLabor calls it insurance:

Unemployment Insurance

We are soliciting comments on the content and organization of the data on our Web site and any suggestions you have about improving the accessibility to the data. We are also interested in your feedback on any data you would like summarized, e.g., benefits across all programs, that would eliminate the need for users to gather data from several reports and calculate the sum. Your input is important to us in improving the utility of our Web site as a tool for our customers. Please email us with your questions and suggestions.

Emergency Unemployment Compensation (EUC) Extended to January 3, 2012

100% Federal Funding of Extended Benefits (EB) Extended to January 4, 2012

Weeks Claimed in All Programs (Expanded)

In addition to helping workers and their families, the Unemployment Insurance programs play a key role in helping businesses, communities, and the nation's economy. It was created in 1935 in response to the Great Depression, when millions of people lost jobs. They couldn't buy goods and services, which contributed to more layoffs.

Now, as then, the program helps cushion the impact of economic downturns and brings economic stability to communities, states, and the nation by providing temporary income support for laid off workers.

USDeptLabor

Of course, the verbiage is all propaganda, but the words "Unemployment insurance" are clearly official.

BTW, employers do not pay any of this tax, it's all a cost of labor to them, and they would be paying you more were they not required to divert this (along with other taxes, like antiSocial inSecurity, aka FICA) from your paycheck. The "employer contribution" ruse is just more propaganda and contributes greatly to unemployment, about the only guarantee government can keep.

You are right in one respect, though: it is taken from one person and given immediately to another. For instance, the se;lf-employed pay the tax, but they are not allowed to receive any benefit from this "insurance" scam. Just another example of socialist government instigating class warfare.

Lehi

[AmorLibertas]

I find it interesting that tithing in ancient Israel was offered/given on the production of the land (grains, fruits, etc.), and the animals that are born each year or season, and on the spoils of war; not on the wages a person earned for plying a trade. On the other hand, in the LDS Church (and many other modern, conservative churches) tithing is considered to be 1/10th of one's income, whatever its source. It would be rare for a poor person to pay tithing in Biblical times as they would likely not be land or livestock owners. The poor, in fact, would be cared for from the tithes rather than paying them.

In considering the example of Jesus, a Christian might ask themselves "What would Jesus Do" if Jesus received unemployment benefits. Would he tithe on them? For the LDS, I believe the answer would be "yes", since unemployment benefits are considered new income and not the withdrawal of previously deposited income or savings upon which one has already tithed. For other questions, I believe the answer might be, "no", Jesus would not. He would only render unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar's (i.e., pay taxes on the government provided income), but as the income did not come from the production of the land, the increase of livestock, or the spoils of war, it would not be tithed. Nevertheless, He might very well make offerings from the income to feed the hungry, ransom the captive, etc.

[LDS Guy 1986]

BTW, employers do not pay any of this tax, it's all a cost of labor to them, and they would be paying you more were they not required to divert this (along with other taxes, like antiSocial inSecurity, aka FICA) from your paycheck. The "employer contribution" ruse is just more propaganda and contributes greatly to unemployment, about the only guarantee government can keep.

If you actually believe this that is sad, employers would pocket this money are profit or invest it in the business if they were not paying it as taxes. It wouldn't go to the worker at all, and only the irrationally conservative thinks that lower corporate taxes equal higher wages. Education, works skills, collective bargaining, ect these things increase employees wages, not lowering corporate taxes.

Lowering corporate and payroll taxes, create jobs and spurs economic growth but it does not have any notable increase on wages. Now if you want to increase employee's incomes reduce th income tax, not the business tax.

[WalkerW]

Martin Feldstein, "Want to Boost the Economy? Lower Corporate Tax Rates," The Wall Street Journal (Feb. 15, 2011).

"The Corporate Income Tax and Workers' Wages: New Evidence from the 50 States," Tax Foundation Special Report 169 (Aug. 2009).

Thomas E. Woods, Jr., "What Made American Wages Rise? (Hint: It Wasn't Unions or the Government)" in his 33 Questions About American History You're Not Supposed to Ask (Crown Forum, 2007).

Businesses making capital investments is exactly what causes wages to increase.

There is a difference between real wages and nominal wages.

[toon]

It's up to the family to figure that one out, all the bishop/Stake President asks is if you are, not how you are.

My wife and I have a similar situation, last year I was almost run over on the highway. I was knocked off my motorcycle and thank the lord only suffered bad road rash and a sprained wrist. Some time this week I will be receiving a check for approx. $15,000 my share of the settlement after lawyers fees and bills are paid. The money is tax free but it is still income, I have decided to tithe it, which means $1,500 goes to further the work of the Lord. I also tithe my VA disability check even though that is tax free as well.

The point is I decided that for me everything that I receive of monetary value (even a $50 gift card my wife won at work )is income and I tithe 10% I know people that only do taxable income, I know people that only do income after taxes. It's a personal decision, and one that it is between you and the Lord.

I'm curious about this.

It seems that at least a portion of those settlement proceeds would be considered compensation for damages not related to loss of income. To that extent, is it really considered income? If I borrow something of yours, accidentally break it or lose it, and then pay you for the damages, it's only making you whole. I don't see any increase.

[Jeff K.]

If you actually believe this that is sad, employers would pocket this money are profit or invest it in the business if they were not paying it as taxes. It wouldn't go to the worker at all, and only the irrationally conservative thinks that lower corporate taxes equal higher wages. Education, works skills, collective bargaining, ect these things increase employees wages, not lowering corporate taxes.

You mean the extra money that goes to hiring more people, giving raises, offering better healthcare benefits so good employees remain, or bonuses? I was part of running three businesses, and the owners wanted to grow. In all three, they knew that if they took care of their employees, then the business would grow. Not all businesses follow the MacDonalds or Fast Food model.

Maybe real life is more conservative and irrational then alot of people think.

[AddamS]

Thanks everybody for your input, this was really eye-opening.

Bonus credit for the Bishops:

If you guys count tithing, do you keep track of who paid it? I imagine you would need to for tax purposes.

If someone claims they are paying tithing but you haven't seen any funds from them to the church, do they lose thier recommend?

[Lareliw]

I worked for UI in Wisconsin for a few years before I became a stay at home mother. UI is not money that is taken from your paychecks while you are working. Unemployment Insurance is a premium that the Employer is required to pay into a state account based on the number of employees they have. When you receive a UI check, it comes out of the account the Employer has with the state set up for this purpose. Individual employees do NOT contribute in any way to this account/fund. When you receive a UI check, it is considered taxable income when you file taxes, because it is the same as receiving a paycheck basically. When my husband was on it after his place of work closed, I had taxes taken out because I have experience in the field and I have known people who have not done it and owed at the end of the year.

Just to reiterate, UI comes directly from the Employer, not any type of employee funding at all. Thanks

[thesometimesaint]

Lareliw:

Incorrect UI is part of an employees compensation package. They get it in return for their labor in the event they become unemployed. Don't become unemployed you don't collect that part of your pay you worked for. Same with Health Insurance don't get sick you don't collect.

[LeSellers]

for the Bishops:

If you guys count tithing, do you keep track of who paid it? I imagine you would need to for tax purposes.

Bishops rarely actually count the money, but they are responsible for it. They call "financial clerks" who do most of the counting. But they do get reports, and the money is always in the hands of two people at a time to avoid temptation, among other things. (The sealed envelopes are received by one person, but only bishopric members except for deacons who can receive the fast offering.)

If someone claims they are paying tithing but you haven't seen any funds from them to the church, do they lose thier recommend?

My mother was a full tithe payer, even when my father was not. She did not ever have income of her own, so her donations were $0, but she was, as I said, a "full tithe payer", and held a recommend.

In 1999, I was a full tithe payer, with six-figure income that year, but I paid my tithes directly to the Presiding Bishop, not my local bishop who never saw a nickel from me (and it didn't show up in my local records, either). And when he asked me if I was a full tithe payer (in a Temple Recommend interview and at tithing settlement), I honestly answered, "yes", and he did not pursue it in the least.

Lehi

[LeSellers]

Just to reiterate, UI comes directly from the Employer, not any type of employee funding at all. Thanks

Sorry, this is simply not true. Unemployment insurance is taken from the employees indirectly, but it comes from the employee just the same.

Lehi

[LDS Guy 1986]

To that extent, is it really considered income?

No, I am tithing from the $15,000 I received, my settlement was $35,000. So $20,000 was for the medical bills and the attorney fees, since this part of the settlement isn't an increase but a restoration to my original condition.

Now you could argue that UI is the same thing but I disagree, replacing income is still income (what UI does it gives you a portion of your wages), replacing damages and medical bills from an accident that was due to someone else negligence is not income.

I reached these decisions through pondering the matter and prayer, and each person must to the same for themselves.

In fact at first I was thinking of tithing from the whole $35,000 till I started pondering and praying about it and the spirit guided me to only tithe from my increase of the settlement not the whole thing.

[ERayR]

WRONG, it isn't an insurance, it is a social net entitlement, and if you do not actively look for work (in the US at least 3 interviews or applications a week) while collecting unemployment you are committing a felony with a maximum sentence of 10 years in federal prison.

You do not have a policy number, it isn't automatic coverage, you have to apply for the benefit after you lose your employment, and meet strict requirements (actively looking for work, willing to accept and job offered and/or attend vocational retraining) if at any time you are collecting benefits and lying about being eligible(by playing video games instead of looking for work) for them you are a breaking federal law and can become a convicted felon.

Wrong it is called Unemployment Insurance and is a government run insurance program.

[ERayR]

I would be disinclined to pay tithing on unemployment checks.

If you don't need 10% of the check for necessary expenses, perhaps it would be better to give it back to the government instead of giving it to a church...?

But ultimately, I would defer to the judgment of my Bishop and just ask him if he wants me to tithe on unemployment.

Why? I don't see your reasoning. It is an insurance policy of which you do not even pay the premiums. They are paid by your employer so technically it is all increase. It is getting money from an insurance program you didn't pay for, for work you didn't do.

Your payroll deductions pay for taxes and medicare and social security.

[ERayR]

I find it interesting that tithing in ancient Israel was offered/given on the production of the land (grains, fruits, etc.), and the animals that are born each year or season, and on the spoils of war; not on the wages a person earned for plying a trade. On the other hand, in the LDS Church (and many other modern, conservative churches) tithing is considered to be 1/10th of one's income, whatever its source. It would be rare for a poor person to pay tithing in Biblical times as they would likely not be land or livestock owners. The poor, in fact, would be cared for from the tithes rather than paying them.

In considering the example of Jesus, a Christian might ask themselves "What would Jesus Do" if Jesus received unemployment benefits. Would he tithe on them? For the LDS, I believe the answer would be "yes", since unemployment benefits are considered new income and not the withdrawal of previously deposited income or savings upon which one has already tithed. For other questions, I believe the answer might be, "no", Jesus would not. He would only render unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar's (i.e., pay taxes on the government provided income), but as the income did not come from the production of the land, the increase of livestock, or the spoils of war, it would not be tithed. Nevertheless, He might very well make offerings from the income to feed the hungry, ransom the captive, etc.

Tithing is 1/10 of ones increase. I do not see any caveat concerning the source of said increasse. If it is increase tith on it. If it is not then don't.

Remember the parable of the Widow's mite?

[ERayR]

Sorry, this is simply not true. Unemployment insurance is taken from the employees indirectly, but it comes from the employee just the same.

Lehi

Lehi normally I agree with you but on this onw I differ. UI is an insurance paid by the employer and I know very few employers who would give this to the employee if they were not required to pay it.

[AmorLibertas]

The widows mite was an offering, not a tithe.

[ERayR]

The widows mite was an offering, not a tithe.

Enlighten me to the subtle difference.

[Lareliw]

It is not part of your job, because not ALL employers have it. If you have under 8 employees (I believe it is 8, it may be 10, it has been about 6 years since I worked there), they do not provide it. It is not part of employee "compensation" in the same regard that a paycheck is. Sorry if you feel differently, but being that I actually did this as my JOB for years, I do know the ins and outs quite well.

[LDS Guy 1986]

It is not part of your job, because not ALL employers have it. If you have under 8 employees (I believe it is 8, it may be 10, it has been about 6 years since I worked there), they do not provide it. It is not part of employee "compensation" in the same regard that a paycheck is. Sorry if you feel differently, but being that I actually did this as my JOB for years, I do know the ins and outs quite well.

I though it was under 50 employees for most labor related stuff?

[Lareliw]

Federal Unemployment Tax Act

The Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA), authorizes the Internal Revenue Service to collect a Federal employer tax used to fund state workforce agencies. Employers pay this tax annually by filing IRS Form 940. FUTA covers the costs of administering the UI and Job Service programs in all states. In addition, FUTA pays one-half of the cost of extended unemployment benefits (during periods of high unemployment) and provides for a fund from which states may borrow, if necessary, to pay benefits.

As far as the number of employees a business is required to have before they have to pay out UI, I actually can't find it right now! I apologize, my brain is a little fuddled as I am a bit nervous, having surgery tomorrow! But I will try to find the reference, and if I do, I will pass it on!

[LDS Guy 1986]

I apologize, my brain is a little fuddled as I am a bit nervous, having surgery tomorrow!

You'll be in my families prayers tonight! Hope your operation goes well!

[Lareliw]

Thank you very much!

You'll be in my families prayers tonight! Hope your operation goes well!