I refuse to call the Social Security tax a “payroll tax.” Alas, the rest of the media has bought into Barack Obama’s newspeak. The reality is it is part of the Federal Insurance Contributions Act, which also funds Medicare. President Obama and a Democratic Congress decided to short-change Social Security by $120 billion this year in the name of a stimulus — and now President Obama and Democrats want to short-change Social Security by $260 billion next year. Republicans are reluctant to do something this fiscally irresponsible, but Senate Republicans are willing to do it for another two months. That will not work
From ABC News :
Pete Isberg, president of the [nonprofit National Payroll Reporting Consortium] today wrote to the key leaders of the relevant committees of the House and Senate, telling them that “insufficient lead time” to implement the complicated change mandated by the legislation means the two-month payroll tax holiday “could create substantial problems, confusion and costs affecting a significant percentage of U.S. employers and employees.”…
The two-month payroll tax holiday, which the president has said should be extended throughout 2012, will mean that wages would face a Social Security tax of 4.2 percent during January and February, but it would increase to 6.2 percent in March.
Isberg wrote that “many payroll systems are not likely to be able to make such a substantial programming change before January or even February. The systems affected tend to be highly complex, normally requiring at least ninety days for a change of this magnitude for software testing alone; not to mention analysis, design, coding and implementation.”
From Allah Pundit : “That’s not the only group that says two months is too short. The National Association of Wholesale-Distributors wrote to Congress today to second the conclusions of the NPRC, so in case there was any lingering doubt about how tonight’s House vote will go, this should eliminate it. The only mystery now is how partisan the roll will be. Will House Democrats stick with Reid by endorsing a policy that would cause chaos to payrolls across the country or will they bail too, backing Reid into a corner? And what happens now to Senate Republicans like Scott Brown who have been grumbling that Boehner’s reversal on the two-month extension is ‘irresponsible and wrong’? Do they cave under the weight of the NPRC verdict or press on for another dumb, lazy stopgap measure? Only one thing is certain: If not for one last round of congressional histrionics and floor drama, there’d be nothing to blog about this week at all.
The reality is it is part of the Federal Insurance Contributions Act, which also funds Medicare. President Obama and a Democratic Congress decided to short-change Social Security by $120 billion this year in the name of a stimulus — and now President
FICA & FUTA: If you would usually hire someone other than your child, you can save a lot in federal taxes by employing your kid instead. If your child is under 18, you may not be required to pay Social Security, Medicare or federal unemployment
The White House pushed the cut in what also is known as the FICA tax as a means to put more money in the pockets of consumers in hopes that it would spur economic activity. Mark Zandi, chief economist and co-founder of Moody's Analytics,
It's the reason the official title for the funding side is Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA), as opposed to something different, such as Federal Economic Security Tax for Elderly Retirees (FESTER?). Contributions into the federal government's

The payroll tax actually is the line on your pay stub labeled FICA - the Federal Insurance Contributions Act. Although technically - and legally - a tax, the architects of Social Security always intended FICA as a premium payment that workers would
I refuse to call the Social Security tax a “payroll tax.” Alas, the rest of the media has bought into Barack Obama’s newspeak. The reality is it is part of the Federal Insurance Contributions Act, which also funds Medicare. President Obama and a Democratic Congress decided to short-change Social Security by $120 billion this year in the name of a stimulus — and now President Obama and Democrats want to short-change Social Security by $260 billion next year. Republicans are reluctant to do something this fiscally irresponsible, but Senate Republicans are willing to do it for another two months. That will not work
From ABC News :
Pete Isberg, president of the [nonprofit National Payroll Reporting Consortium] today wrote to the key leaders of the relevant committees of the House and Senate, telling them that “insufficient lead time” to implement the complicated change mandated by the legislation means the two-month payroll tax holiday “could create substantial problems, confusion and costs affecting a significant percentage of U.S. employers and employees.”…
The two-month payroll tax holiday, which the president has said should be extended throughout 2012, will mean that wages would face a Social Security tax of 4.2 percent during January and February, but it would increase to 6.2 percent in March.
Isberg wrote that “many payroll systems are not likely to be able to make such a substantial programming change before January or even February. The systems affected tend to be highly complex, normally requiring at least ninety days for a change of this magnitude for software testing alone; not to mention analysis, design, coding and implementation.”
From Allah Pundit : “That’s not the only group that says two months is too short. The National Association of Wholesale-Distributors wrote to Congress today to second the conclusions of the NPRC, so in case there was any lingering doubt about how tonight’s House vote will go, this should eliminate it. The only mystery now is how partisan the roll will be. Will House Democrats stick with Reid by endorsing a policy that would cause chaos to payrolls across the country or will they bail too, backing Reid into a corner? And what happens now to Senate Republicans like Scott Brown who have been grumbling that Boehner’s reversal on the two-month extension is ‘irresponsible and wrong’? Do they cave under the weight of the NPRC verdict or press on for another dumb, lazy stopgap measure? Only one thing is certain: If not for one last round of congressional histrionics and floor drama, there’d be nothing to blog about this week at all.