Breaking News

Budget crises in Kansas and California have already forced those states to halt tax refund processing. In California, there’s even been talk of sending out government IOUs instead of money.

In New York, state officials insist they have enough money set aside to pay tax refunds, but tax preparers in the state say refund checks are taking an awfully long time to arrive. And around the country, with 46 states facing budget crises, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, some taxpayers worry that their refund checks might be withheld as well.

When Camarillo, Calif., resident Christine Hughes logs in to check on the status of her refund, all she sees is this disheartening message:

“Your refund cannot be issued at this time. Due to the state’s persistent cash flow problems, the State Controller has directed (this agency) to stop sending refund requests to the State Controller’s office for processing.” Hughes says she and her husband are awaiting $1,000 in refunds from California. “It’s pretty ridiculous, but what can we do?” she said.

California officials suspended tax refund payments in January to free up $2 billion for state operations as the state’s budget crisis reached epic proportions — with a $42 billion deficit and coffers essentially running on zero for 17 months. Despite the budget compromise forged on Feb. 19 by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the state Legislature, it’s still not clear when refund payments will resume.

In Kansas, refunds were halted temporarily by a budget battle pitting Democratic Gov. Kathleen Sebelius against the Republican-controlled Legislature. The lawmakers passed a budget with spending cuts of around $300 million, but Sebelius refused to sign it. At the same time, she had asked to borrow $225 million from another government agency to cover the refund payments, but Republicans blocked that. The two sides reached a deal last week and state officials there say refund checks should be sent out shortly.

Placing tax refund payments in limbo could make states liable for interest payments, but many state governments have given themselves a wide grace period – much more than your bank gives you. In California, residents who are forced to wait for their returns are entitled to interest payments only if the delay extends 45 days beyond April 15.

Hughes said she thinks it’s unfair for state officials to treat her refund like a free loan. She plans reduce her paycheck withholding for state taxes until her refund arrives.

“If they can’t pay the taxpayers back what we are owed, we should not be obligated to give them any more of our hard earned money to mismanage,” she said.

Red Tape Wrestling Tips: A withholding cautionary tale
Of course, residents of any state with an income tax would have nothing to fear if they’d set their paycheck tax withholding amounts to the appropriate level. Many people don’t, and in fact relish the thought of a big refund check every spring. That’s wrong-headed.

BankRate.com says that last year, the average federal tax refund check was $2,700, meaning the average taxpayer gave Uncle Sam $225 too much every month. Fine-tuning that withholding amount could be your very own stimulus package.

But don’t overdo it. If you underpay your taxes this year and owe a big bill next April 15, in most cases you’ll be charged underpayment penalties.

You can change your withholding amount at any time by getting a W-4 form from your employer. The IRS offers a handy withholding payment Web-based calculator. This form will only help you fine-tune your federal tax payments, but state tax payments are generally based on similar formulas, so the tool is still helpful.

If you haven’t examined your withholding elections for a while, now is a good time to look. In this economy, you should keep as much of your money in your own hands as much as possible.

Hidefumi Ito lives in a net room in Japan, a closet-sized space offering him a refuge from homelessness.

TOKYO, Japan (CNN) — The extent of the economic malaise that has descended on once-prosperous Japan is evident in the latest economic figures showing the steepest ever fall in the Far Eastern nation’s industrial output.

Production at the country’s factories fell a record 10 percent in January as export partners cut back on orders.

Exports plunged an unprecedented 45.7 percent last month, as major exporters such as Toyota and Nissan announced further production cutbacks.  Falling global demand for Japan’s cars and electronics has led to increased unemployment.  The number of people classed as unemployed rose for the third month in a row, by 210,000 to 2.77 million in January.

Economists said a fall in the unemployment rate to 4.1 percent in January from 4.3 percent in December indicated disheartened jobseekers were leaving the market.  “Jobless people are simply giving up looking for new work,” said Credit Suisse economist Satoru Ogasawara. “I’m sure this figure doesn’t mean employment is improving.”

Tent cities housing the jobless, and now homeless, have sprung up in Japanese parks.

The rows of tents offering shelter for the unemployed present a shocking reality to a country where lifetime employment was the rule just a decade ago.

A change in labor laws led to a rise in temporary workers — they now make up a third of Japan’s workforce.

They have few employment rights compared to full-time workers and are now the ones being cast aside as companies brace themselves for a deepening recession.

The more fortunate have found shelter in net rooms in the city; small rooms offered to workers at a daily rate of around $20 for 24 hours. They’re the size of closets but have two essential tools for job-hunting: a computer and Internet hook-up.

CNN first met Hidefumi Ito in his net room six months ago. A former art gallery director, Ito lost not only his job and his home, but contact with his three children when his wife walked out on him.

He’s still living in a net room, but has been employed as a custodian by the company who runs them. For eight hours a day, he scrubs toilets and makes beds for a monthly salary of $1,600.

Tsukasa, the company that created the net rooms, says it’s running at 100 percent occupancy at all of its buildings. Tsukasa’s general manager, Koji Kawamata, says the company is currently building more of the rooms but is struggling to keep up with demand.

There’s no sign yet that demand will start to wane. Japan, Asia’s largest economy by GDP, also reported the steepest decline in monthly household spending since the country slid into recession last year.
advertisement

Household spending fell 5.9 percent in January, compared with a year ago, indicating consumers are becoming more reluctant to spend what money they have.

Japan’s core inflation figure was steady in January, raising fears that deflation could return less than two years after the last period of falling prices.

President unveils budget; aims to expand health coverage, hike some taxes and is eyeing more bank-rescue funds.

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama is sending Congress a “hard choices” budget that would boost taxes on the wealthy and curtail Medicare payments to insurance companies and hospitals to make way for a $634 billion down payment on universal health care.

Obama’s first budget, which will top $3 trillion, predicts the deficit for this year will soar to a whopping $1.75 trillion. The huge deficit reflects the massive spending being undertaken to battle a severe recession and the worst financial crisis in seven decades.

The new budget also plans for additional financial bailouts of up to $750 billion, a senior administration official told NBC News. But the White House believes that as the economy improves it will get roughly $500 billion back, so the expected cost to taxpayers is $250 billion.

Obama, in a morning briefing, spoke of “hard choices that lie ahead.” He called his budget “an honest accounting of where we are and where we intend to go.”

“We need to be honest with ourselves about which costs are being racked up,” said the president. He pledged that the budget will focus on rebuilding the “foundations” of the American economy.

One administration official called the request for additional bailout resources a “placeholder” in advance of a determination by the Treasury Department of what will actually be needed.

The spending blueprint Obama is sending Congress is a 140-page outline, with the complete details scheduled to come in mid to late April, when the new administration sends up the massive budget books that will flesh out the plan.

However, the submission of the bare budget outline was certain to set off fierce debate in Congress over Obama’s spending and tax priorities. The document includes additional requests for the current year and Obama’s proposals for the 2010 budget year, which begins Oct. 1.

The budget balances efforts to fulfill Obama’s campaign pledges to deliver tax cuts to the middle class, expand health care coverage and combat the economic crisis with an effort to keep an exploding deficit over the next few years from becoming a permanent drag on the economy. However, Republicans assailed the budget for the tax increases and some Democrats worried that Obama was not doing enough to get the deficit under control.

“I would give him good marks as a beginning, but we have to do a lot more to take on this long-term debt buildup,” said Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D.

Republicans zeroed in on the tax increases to fund half of Obama’s health care expansion.
“Everyone agrees that all Americans deserve access to affordable health care, but is increasing taxes during an economic recession, especially on small businesses, the right way to accomplish that goal?” asked House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio.

The $634 billion down payment on expanding health care coverage would come from a $318 billion increase over 10 years in taxes on the wealthy, defined as couples making more than $250,000 per year and individuals making more than $200,000. The tax increase would occur by reducing the benefit the wealthy get on tax deductions. As one example, taxpayers in the current top tax bracket of 35 percent would see their tax deduction for every $1 given to charity drop from 35 cents to 28 cents.

The other half of the down payment on Obama’s drive toward universal health care — $318 billion — would come from curtailing payments to hospitals and insurance companies under Medicare and drug payments under Medicaid.

To meet his pledge of tax cuts for the middle class, the president wants to make permanent the $400 annual tax cut due to start showing up in workers’ paychecks in April as part of the $787 billion stimulus package just passed by Congress. Obama’s budget also extends the middle class tax cuts passed by the Bush administration in 2001 and 2003. Those cuts were due to expire at the end of 2010. If Congress approves Obama’s recommendations, the Bush tax cuts would only expire for couples making more than $250,000 per year.

The cost of the stimulus bill and the increased bailout support would push the deficit for this year to $1.75 trillion, a level — as a percentage of the economy — not seen since World War II. The deficit is expected to remain around $1 trillion for the next two years before starting to decline to $533 billion in 2013, according to budget projections.

Obama’s plan proposes achieving $634 billion in savings on projected health care spending and diverting those resources to expanding coverage for uninsured Americans. The $634 billion represents a little more than half the money that would be needed to extend health insurance to all of the 48 million Americans now uninsured.  Americans now spend a total of $2.4 trillion a year on health care.

War Costs

Obama also will ask for an additional $75 billion to cover the costs of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan through September, the end of the current budget year. That would be on top of the $40 billion already appropriated by Congress, the administration official said.

The administration will also ask for $130 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan in 2010 and will budget the costs of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan at $50 billion annually over the next several years.

Obama’s budget proposal would effectively raise income taxes and curb tax deductions on couples making more than $250,000 a year, beginning in 2011. By not extending former President George W. Bush’s tax cuts for such wealthier filers, Obama would allow the marginal rate on household incomes above $250,000 to rise from 35 percent to 39.6 percent.

The plan also contains a contentious proposal to raise hundreds of billions of dollars by auctioning off permits to exceed carbon emissions caps, which Obama wants to impose on users of fossil fuels to address global warming.

Some of the revenues from the pollution permits would be used to extend the “Making Work Pay” tax credit of $400 for individuals and $800 for couples beyond 2010, as provided in the just-passed economic stimulus bill.

About half of what officials characterized as a $634 billion “down payment” toward health care coverage for every American would come from cuts in Medicare. That is sure to incite battles with doctors, hospitals, health insurance companies and drug manufacturers.

Some of the Medicare savings would come from scaling back payments to private insurance plans that serve older Americans, which many analysts believe to be inflated. Other proposals include charging upper-income beneficiaries a higher premium for Medicare’s prescription drug coverage.

To raise the other half, Obama wants to reduce the rate by which wealthier people can cut their taxes through deductions for mortgage interest, charitable contributions, local taxes and other expenses to 28 cents on the dollar,

rather than the 35 cents they can claim now. Even more money would be raised if the top rate reverts to 39.6 percent, as Obama wants.

Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, called Obama’s proposal to tax the wealthy to finance health care reform a starting point. But he wants to also examine taxing some of health insurance benefits provided by employers — an idea rejected by Obama in last year’s presidential campaign.

Budget documents provided to The Associated Press show that Obama will not lay out a detailed blueprint for a health care overhaul, but a set of broad policy principles and some specific ideas for how to raise a big chunk of the money.

Obama’s promise to phase out direct payments to farming operations with revenues above $500,000 a year is sure to cause concerns among rural Democrats.

Even after all those difficult choices, cutting about $2 trillion from the budget over 10 years, Obama’s budget still would feature huge deficits.

The $1.75 trillion deficit projected for this year would represent 12.3 percent of the gross domestic product, double the previous post-war record of 6 percent in 1983, when Ronald Reagan was president, and the highest level since the deficit totaled 21.5 percent of GDP in 1945, at the end of World War II.

At $533 billion, the deficit in 2013 will be about 3 percent of the size of the economy, a level that administration officials said would be manageable.

A new housing development in Las Vegas, a market like several others in the U.S. where the cost equation has shifted in favor of homeownership.

The relative cost of owning versus renting is swinging back in favor of homeownership in some U.S. markets, buoyed by several quarters of sharp declines in home prices.

At the height of the housing boom, as home prices surged, demand for rentals started to rise as the gap between owning and renting widened significantly. Even after the housing market soured, apartment demand grew as former homeowners became renters, allowing landlords to push healthy rent increases.  Now, after two years of rapid home-price depreciation, the relationship between the cost of rental payments versus after-tax mortgage payments is tilting toward ownership in a number of metropolitan areas.

Over the past 18 years, after-tax mortgage payments have averaged 26% more than rent payments, according to Green Street Advisors, a real-estate consultancy based in Newport Beach, Calif. In 2006, at the height of the housing bubble, mortgage payments reached as high as 66% more than rent payments. But by the end of 2008, average monthly rent for the largest 50 metropolitan areas was $1,045, compared with after-tax mortgage payments of $1,300, assuming a rate of 5.5% on a 30-year fixed mortgage. That means mortgage payments averaged just 24% more than rent payments, the narrowest gap since 2001.

In more than half of the top 50 U.S. housing markets — including Los Angeles, northern Virginia and Las Vegas — the ratio is now below its 18-year average. In Los Angeles, for example, mortgage payments averaged 60% more than rent payments between 1990 and 2008. Now, those payments average 30% more than rent.

“We’re not saying on an absolute basis that it’s cheaper to own a home, but on a relative basis…owning is looking much more attractive than it has in a long time,” said Andrew McCulloch, a Green Street analyst. While the shift doesn’t mean that renters will rush to buy homes soon, “it’s not a ‘no-brainer’ anymore if they’re going to rent versus own,” he said.

If mortgage rates fall to 4.5% — and some economists have called for the government to push rates to that level to ease the housing crisis — mortgage payments would average 14% more than rent payments, a level last reached in 1998.

While lower rates could further boost home affordability, that may not be enough to overcome a psychological barrier for many would-be buyers who believe homes will become even more affordable. “One of the challenges in the housing market is not only affordability but also willingness to buy,” said Nicolas Retsinas, the director of Harvard University’s Joint Center for Housing Studies. “People are still worried about falling prices.”

And lending standards are much tighter than they were during the housing boom, when less-creditworthy tenants left apartments in droves to take advantage of no-money-down financing. At the housing market’s peak, nearly one in four renters left to buy homes, said Richard Campo, chief executive of Houston-based Camden Property Trust. That rate fell to near its historical norm of around 12% by the end of 2008. “The nonqualified renters are not moving out this time,” said Mr. Campo.

A separate report by Moody’s Economy.com also finds that home prices relative to rents are more in line with their historical relationship. Using data that measure average home prices and rent payments for 54 metro areas between 1984 and 2004, Moody’s Economy.com estimated that eight markets are “undervalued.” In those eight markets, home prices relative to rents are below or within 5% of their historical levels. “The bottom is coming into view,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Economy.com, “But we’ve still got a ways to go.”

The report notes that home prices relative to rents remain well above historical levels in 30 markets, including Philadelphia; Portland, Ore.; and Virginia Beach, Va.

Lower prices and interest rates are spurring some buyers to get off the sidelines. Jason Schanta, 37, an independent contractor, has been ready to buy for three years, but he said he waited because Southern California home prices had become “outrageous.”

“I’m not an economic guru but I knew the bubble was going to burst,” he said. He is ready to buy a $500,000 home if Bank of America Corp.’s Countrywide Financial unit approves a short sale on the property in San Juan Capistrano, Calif. (In a short sale, the lender agrees to sell a home for less than the value of the mortgage.) Mr. Schanta currently rents a three-bedroom house for $2,250 a month, and says that he will pay just $150 more in mortgage payments and taxes for a house that has an additional bedroom and 350 more square feet. “Renting now costs just as much as buying,” he said.

Others are finding that they could pay less on their mortgage than they would on rent. Carla Zeineh, 22, and her husband recently began shopping for a home in Irvine, Calif., and discovered that with a 5% mortgage rate, her monthly payment on a $350,000 two-bedroom home with 20% down could be less than the $1,800 month that they pay in rent on their two-bedroom condo.