Posted on 08/18/2009 8:57:36 AM PDT by combat_boots
Humanity and Pets Partnered Through the Years (HAPPY) Act (Introduced in House)
HR 3501 IH 111th CONGRESS 1st Session To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a deduction for pet care expenses.
[snip]
Mr. MCCOTTER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means --------------------------------------------------------------- A BILL To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a deduction for pet care expenses.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Humanity and Pets Partnered Through the Years (HAPPY) Act'.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds the following:
(1) According to the 2007-2008 National Pet Owners Survey, 63 percent of United States households own a pet.
(2) The Human-Animal Bond has been shown to have positive effects upon people's emotional and physical well-being.
SEC. 3. DEDUCTION FOR PET CARE EXPENSES.
(a) In General- Part VII of subchapter B of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to additional itemized deductions for individuals) is amended by redesignating section 224 as section 225 and by inserting after section 223 the following new section:
`SEC. 224. PET CARE EXPENSES.
`(a) Allowance of Deduction- In the case of an individual, there shall be allowed as a deduction for the taxable year an amount equal to the qualified pet care expenses of the taxpayer during the taxable year for any qualified pet of the taxpayer.
`(b) Maximum Deduction- The amount allowable as a deduction under subsection (a) to the taxpayer for any taxable year shall not exceed $3,500.
`(c) Qualified Pet Care Expenses- For purposes of this section, the term `qualified pet care expenses'...
(Excerpt) Read more at thomas.loc.gov ...
The math would still work. It’s a cut for some, not for all, but that’s a mighty big “some” in this case.
I am deliberately ignoring the propaganda value of the move. It would be the warmest, fuzziest thing to come out of a Rat Congress for decades.
It is still unfair to those that don’t have dogs,cats,snakes,gerbils,pot bellied pigs, rats and on and on. It still empowers congress in their pick and choose scheme. That’s why the tax code is tens of thousands of pages. I could write the tax code on ONE page. But than there would be a lot of dissapointed people.
I think animal shelters and pet stores would find their business picking up quickly after such a bill passes. I can’t see a partisan angle to it. Shoot, it would even apply to goldfish.
I agree this is better than a lot of stuff congress does but it is still wrong. Bye the way I beleive MCCOTTER is a republican.
Hey, check this out. Its hillarious
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2319179/posts
I’m from Calif and I think I’ll send it to my reps.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.