Comments on: HAPPY Act: $3,500 Pet Care Expenses Deduction (Proposed)

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 17 Sep 2011 03:54:09 +0000

Happy Act will make it possible for people to own pets and get them off the streets and out of the shelters and into a loving home.. I have 5 cats & “Happy Act” would be a big help..

By: sarah

sarah — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 21:08:48 +0000

Your argument about the government knowing how many pets a person his is ridiculous. The same thing happens with children. It is called a social security number. This is how people who have children get their tax breaks. Don’t think think that giving tax breaks for having children is essentially “paying” people to have children just like you think that this bill will be essentially people being “paid” to have pets!?

By: Pam

Pam — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:06:34 +0000

Im a widow, house paid for(old house) car paid for, children grown, so no deductions but I still pay high property taxes, utilities,food etc, I have a dog for companionship.One vet visit is $50.00, lab fees another several 100,and she does need to eat, I would love a deduction in my yearly taxes for my beloved dog. I don’t have children that Im feeding with food stamps & taking to the doctor on state access, but my taxes are pay for it.How about a break for me.

By: Sam

Sam — Mon, 11 Apr 2011 02:37:08 +0000

I like this bill. Last May of 2010 my dog was diagnosis with diabetes and now we give her insulin injections twice daily. Her initial care at the time was very expense which included hospital care and frequent doctor visits totaling about $1,500.00 the first three months. We also now have to purchase her insulin once a month. She has been a part of our family since Feb. 2000 and there was no way that we would not see to it that she receives medical care. It has been financially tough and a bill like this can help people be more responsible of taking care of their pets.
I wished it was available during this tax year, I needed it.

By: ME

ME — Sun, 03 Apr 2011 04:31:55 +0000

Tax codes for education and other governmental services apply to all. Should we ask victims of theft, rape, murder, and other crimes to pay for the taxes that apply to the police force? Should retirees with grown children be exempt along with the young adults without children?

I disagreed with the wars we undertook in the early 2000′s, but I paid taxes that paid for the war, and I support the work of our troops for they are people doing a job on my behalf. We have no way to thank them.

The problem is that there are too many social divisions that could be made. It isn’t “Fair” that people who chose to have pets and not children have to pay taxes for child services. It is equally unfair for people who can’t have children and want children to be reminded of their situation every time they see children, pass a school, or pay education taxes.

This world isn’t fair and society must still function. So we all pay for some services for the betterment of society. As I stated earlier, I don’t support the bill, but I don’t begrudge anyone their rights and in this case an equal tax deduction to that of a child.

Finally, I am a lower middle class person who chose a child and can’t afford the pet I would like, but that doesn’t mean that I want to add to the injustice of the system for my select group’s benefit. Therefore I am offended by the blanket statement about those opposing the bill.

By: ME

ME — Sun, 03 Apr 2011 04:14:31 +0000

The child tax credit is $1,000 per child regardless of income. Are your pets entitled to more benefits/ tax credits than my child is? No. If this legislation is to pass the credit should be equal. Because I can understand you position and life choice, this compromise change would be fair, even through I personally don’t support this bill. The alternative is to raise the child tax credit to match at the same time that this bill is passed.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 20:59:18 +0000

There should be a limit on how many animals a person can own based on how capable he/she is of paying for their care. Animals should not be considered property. They are living creatures that we have a responsibility to care for and unfortunately, since many people don’t see it that way, there are people out there who have to take on other people’s throwaway pets… those people deserve a tax break just like someone who is fostering a child would.

By: Cathy

Cathy — Mon, 21 Feb 2011 13:34:51 +0000

I really hope this bill is passed. So many pets are abandoned or brought to shelters since people can’t afford their care, especially if they become ill.
Animals are living beings and shouldn’t be discarded when they have medical issues. It would be wonderful to get some money back as I have spent 4 x as much on all my animals when they have become infirm. A society is judged by the way they treat their people and animals. Wake up you stupid people who don’t want this to pass.

By: Carol

Carol — Sat, 19 Feb 2011 02:38:04 +0000

I have a 83 year old mother, who would be lost with out her dog. I take care of all her Vet bills, so I say YES to this.

By: Dan

Dan — Sun, 06 Feb 2011 22:42:52 +0000

To JAMES:

Have you perhaps ever heard of web etiquette? Quit yelling would you. I am a tax payer, and happen to have animals that I consider my family. Would you also advocate that someone has any more right to deduct their “children”? I don’t recall that having kids was a requirement in life and would definitely see it as a luxary; so please, to each their own.

By: Allir

Allir — Sat, 05 Feb 2011 04:23:35 +0000

Okay James, then we should cut out the tax return for having a baby. People choose to have children, most of them knowing they can’t afford them. My husband and I can’t have children, so we have 2 dogs and 5 cats and live them as our children, and it’d be damn nice to get back some of the money I put into them.

By: JAMES

JAMES — Fri, 04 Feb 2011 15:52:08 +0000

WOW… ALL OF THESE WELFARE ATTITUDES ARE MAKING ME SICK. IF YOU WANT TO HAVE A PET YOU PAY FOR IT. THIS IS NOT THE GOVERNMENTS RESPONSIBILITY. I HAVE PETS AND THE FACT THAT SOME IDIOT WANTS TO GOVERNMENT TO PAY FOR THEM IS JUST RETARDED.

IF THIS WAS PASSED PEOPLE WOULD GET PETS FOR THE CREDIT, AND MOST OF THEM WOULD END UP IN SHELTERS.

RACK THIS ON STUPID WASTES OF TAXPAYERS MONEY.

By: KRose

KRose — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 17:51:14 +0000

Just because I am poor are you telling me that I can’t care for an animal? How is controlling who here?

By: KRose

KRose — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 17:48:13 +0000

Apparently you have never cared or loved a sick animal. Try paying the vet bill. And don’t say that they are just animals. If you are Godly person then you should know God commands us to care for our animals. Not neglect or abuse them. This bill is definitely better than others I have heard of. or how about the cost government spends on just a meal out with friends and claim it is business. I bet just that one dinner alone would pay for my vet bill for a years time. Who is wasting money now?

By: KRose

KRose — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 17:35:39 +0000

I own a number of pets including two cats with feline leukemia. When we agreed to take in these cats we agreed to the responsibility of caring for them. They got sick after having them for two years. Now what would you have me do? Kill them? Not on your life? God says we are to look after our animals and this I am doing to the best of my ability; however, the cost is outrageous. So far just in the past 4 months we have spent close to $500 just for check ups and tests. Why not get some kind of tax deduction. the Vets that charge these prices are getting them. Just like a Dr. does for our medical care. My fear is this we will soon not have the $ to care for our beloved pets; therefore they are liable to end up dying, sent to the shelter to die, or dropped off in the middle of nowhere to die. Is this the way humanity is to behave? Plus if people were likely to get some kind of tax deduction, I guarantee you will see healthier animals, and less of them roaming the streets and in shelters.