Shakedown: Treasury now seizing tax refunds from adult children to pay parents’ decades-old Social Security debts

posted at 3:21 pm on April 11, 2014 by Allahpundit

When I say “debts,” I don’t mean loans that the parents willingly sought from SSA. It would be bad enough to hold a kid responsible for that (since when are children responsible for their parents’ obligations?), but at least it would have been voluntarily incurred by mom/dad. The “debts” here are overpayments of Social Security benefits, the product of SSA’s own errors. The parents who received them might not have even realized they were getting money they weren’t supposed to have. And now, somehow, it’s junior’s problem.

But wait. It gets worse.

When [Mary] Grice was 4, back in 1960, her father died, leaving her mother with five children to raise. Until the kids turned 18, Sadie Grice got survivor benefits from Social Security to help feed and clothe them.

Now, Social Security claims it overpaid someone in the Grice family — it’s not sure who — in 1977. After 37 years of silence, four years after Sadie Grice died, the government is coming after her daughter. Why the feds chose to take Mary’s money, rather than her surviving siblings’, is a mystery…

“It was a shock,” said Grice, 58. “What incenses me is the way they went about this. They gave me no notice, they can’t prove that I received any overpayment, and they use intimidation tactics, threatening to report this to the credit bureaus.”

Social Security officials told Grice that six people — Grice, her four siblings and her father’s first wife, whom she never knew — had received benefits under her father’s account. The government doesn’t look into exactly who got the overpayment; the policy is to seek compensation from the oldest sibling and work down through the family until the debt is paid.

SSA insists that they did send notice — to a P.O. Box that Grice hasn’t owned for 35 years, even though they have her current address.

How can they demand restitution for a mistaken payment made in the late 1970s, let alone from someone who didn’t even receive it? Because: The farm bill that passed in 2011 lifted the 10-year statute of limitations on debts owed to the feds. Treasury has collected more than $400 million since then on very old obligations, many of them below the radar of public scrutiny because the amounts are often small enough, i.e. a few hundred dollars, that the targets find it’s cheaper to pay up than to fight. It’s a shakedown, based on the flawed assumption that a child not only must have benefited from the overpayment to his parent but that he/she received the entirety of the benefit, with little proof offered that the debt even exists. (One man who was forced to pay demanded a receipt from SSA affirming that his balance was now zero. The SSA clerk told him he’d put in the request but that the man shouldn’t expect to receive anything.) The only reason you’re hearing about Grice’s case, I think, is because they went after her for thousands, not hundreds, of dollars, which was enough of a hit to make her get a lawyer. Turns out that the feds had seized and then continued to hold her federal and state refunds, an amount greater than $4,400 — even though they were only demanding $2,996 from her to pay off her father’s debt. Lo and behold, once WaPo found out and started asking questions, the $1,400 excess was promptly returned to her. Amazing how fast bureaucracy can move when someone looks behind the curtain.

The whole thing is Kafkaesque — opaque, oppressive, arbitrary, and sinister in its indifference to making sure the right person pays so long as someone does. After reading the story, it’s not obvious to me what’s stopping Treasury from demanding a payment from every taxpayer whose parents are dead. If the chief witnesses are gone and the feds don’t have to prove that a child actually received any benefits from overpayment, the only “check” on this process is SSA’s willingness to tell the truth about who owes them money and how much. You trust them, don’t you?

Exit question from Karl: Isn’t holding children responsible for their parents’ retirement debts the governing model of the Democratic Party?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Allahpundit should be ashamed for using these McCarthy-esque tactics on the SSA. The SSA is the victim here.

/sarc

gwelf on April 11, 2014 at 3:26 PM

Leftist thugs want today’s kids to pay restitution for slavery too.

Also, see German kids.

Schadenfreude on April 11, 2014 at 3:26 PM

I hate this.

Alana on April 11, 2014 at 3:26 PM

I don’t find this story surprising in the least.

PetecminMd on April 11, 2014 at 3:27 PM

Because: The farm bill that passed in 2011 lifted the 10-year statute of limitations on debts owed to the feds.

Stupid question with this admin, I know, but … isn’t this unconstitutional? Once the statute expires, how can it be reinstated? Ex post facto?

jwolf on April 11, 2014 at 3:27 PM

And where do they get off withholding State income tax refunds? These are not State debts. Sound like yet another case for the States to launch some lawsuits against the Feds. Again.

Day by day it is looking as though the entirety of the Federal government needs a major re-think. The agencies are out of control.

ss396 on April 11, 2014 at 3:28 PM

Lets have the feds forget about these decade old debts, and we won’t mention how much money Obama has stolen from the citizens and paid to his cronies such as Solyndra etc.

birdwatcher on April 11, 2014 at 3:29 PM

It won’t be long now, and they’ll be after IRA’s, 401K’s, and just about everything else.

moo on April 11, 2014 at 3:29 PM

Always arrange your taxes so you pay some on April15. Refunds are rip offs anyway because you just loaned Barack Obama your money for a year interest free.

ConstantineXI on April 11, 2014 at 3:29 PM

How can they demand restitution for a mistaken payment made in the late 1970s, let alone from someone who didn’t even receive it? Because: The farm bill that passed in 2011 lifted the 10-year statute of limitations on debts owed to the feds. Treasury has collected more than $400 million since then on very old obligations, many of them below the radar of public scrutiny because the amounts are often small enough, i.e. a few hundred dollars, that the targets find it’s cheaper to pay up than to fight.

This is clearly unconstitutional.

Bill of Attainder

For any prior debt in which the statue of limitations applied that debt can no longer be legally pursued because changing the statute of limitations retroactively is clearly unconstitutional. Only debts incurred in or after 2011 (after the law passed) have indefinite collection dates.

I won’t bother addressing the obvious stupidity of attempting to collect a debt from those who didn’t incur it, or agree to be responsible for it.

NotCoach on April 11, 2014 at 3:30 PM

Cattle, parents past SS debt, whe will this stop? Now we know why all of these federal agencies are buying hollow points.

Sven on April 11, 2014 at 3:30 PM

Because: The farm bill that passed in 2011 lifted the 10-year statute of limitations on debts owed to the feds.

Another case of passing something to find out what’s in it.

Bitter Clinger on April 11, 2014 at 3:30 PM

And, hey, Ed & Allah & Co – what’s with these auto-play ads? That is really trashy and tacky. You’re better than that.

ss396 on April 11, 2014 at 3:32 PM

I’m sure they are going through the same review process for those who overpaid their taxes 40 years ago. Right?

HumpBot Salvation on April 11, 2014 at 3:32 PM

When are they going after Sharpton and the $1.9 million he owes in back taxes?

wyntre on April 11, 2014 at 3:32 PM

Here again we can laugh at the absurdity of the canard that the Democrats are “for the little guy”.

Bitter Clinger on April 11, 2014 at 3:33 PM

“What’s ours is ours and what’s yours is ours.”
/Government

Bitter Clinger on April 11, 2014 at 3:34 PM

Terry Gilliam’s Brazil was meant to be a warning shot, not a how to manual.

So who put the lifting of the SoL in the bill?

rbj on April 11, 2014 at 3:35 PM

Every dollar counts when you run a tight fiscal ship like the feds do.

butch on April 11, 2014 at 3:35 PM

Does obama’s BFF Warren Buffett still owe Billions in back taxes? Surely not, since he had a billion he was willing to hand out for march madness nonsense.

HumpBot Salvation on April 11, 2014 at 3:35 PM

and yet another troubling question, whats this got to do with farms?
these idiot legislators need to stop writing bills like this.

dmacleo on April 11, 2014 at 3:36 PM

They have gone after my sister-in-law for the same reason.

Deano1952 on April 11, 2014 at 3:36 PM

The “Godfather” would be proud of the SSA.

sadatoni on April 11, 2014 at 3:37 PM

Tyranny.

rrpjr on April 11, 2014 at 3:37 PM

Does obama’s BFF Warren Buffett still owe Billions in back taxes? Surely not, since he had a billion he was willing to hand out for march madness nonsense.

HumpBot Salvation on April 11, 2014 at 3:35 PM

iirc, and please double check this, they settled this sometime in mid to late 2013.

dmacleo on April 11, 2014 at 3:37 PM

I wonder if they are filtering through the debt lists and cross referencing it with party affiliation…

rmkdbq on April 11, 2014 at 3:39 PM

I said they would get dangerous if they saw themselves losing control. Protect your money. They see it as theirs.

crankyoldlady on April 11, 2014 at 3:40 PM

hello america

under obama if you like your tax refund you can keep your tax refund

BUSH did not do this to the poor and middle class
it is obama

sniffles1999 on April 11, 2014 at 3:42 PM

As the saying goes:
If you pass enough laws, we’ll all be criminals.

Missilengr on April 11, 2014 at 3:42 PM

The government is at war with the people.

GaltBlvnAtty on April 11, 2014 at 3:43 PM

ONLY under OBAMA are you liable for a debt of a dead parent from over 40 years ago

hey, i guess the fuel costs for the obama vacation of the month club is going up

or is this how obama will pay for the 1 billion he wants to give to the ukraine, which you can ask yourself WHY?

sniffles1999 on April 11, 2014 at 3:43 PM

Terrible. Perhaps some of these adults being pick-pocketed by the government for debts (arguable terminology IMO) their parents accrued while they were children will now understand HOW THEIR CHILDREN WILL FEEL when they have to pay back the SIXTEEN-PLUS TRILLION their parents have accrued in debt (actual debt, too, not overpayments) and left behind for them!!!!!

No. No, I doubt that thought will occur to any of them. They’ll continue to vote for politicians who do to their own kids what they are so angry is being done to them from when they were kids.

Idiots.

xNavigator on April 11, 2014 at 3:44 PM

I’d like to know which politician(s) is/are responsible for slipping this into the law. They’re in no rush to reveal themselves, but I for one would like to know who is responsible for this little legal nugget of idiocy.

xNavigator on April 11, 2014 at 3:45 PM

More to the point, why does the Fed. need money so bad that it has to pull some arcane, under the radar, sneaky stunt like this?

Could it be that the Fed is in worse shape than we even thought?

Lance Corvette on April 11, 2014 at 3:45 PM

This was passed as a one liner in the farm bill of 2008. Under a Pelosi/Reid Congress. Bush vetoed the bill! And the Dems (with lots of help from squishy republicans) overrode the bill.

This is wrong on so many levels it is insane. There’s no possible way this is legal. Bill of Attainder, evidentiary problems; the fact the payments were made to now deceased–how can this lady and others be held responsible for someone else’s debt? She was no guarantor.

Of course, the liberals will see nothing wrong with this: after all, according to our great next benefactor, Hillary, the feds can spend our money better than we can, so its all fair game.

Vanceone on April 11, 2014 at 3:47 PM

This is outrageous, but one solution might be to pay the exact taxes you owe, rather than overpay and then wait for a refund. Then they have nothing to sieze.

This has two other benefits. First nothing to claim against for ObamaCare penalty. Second, you would not be giving the government an interest-free loan.

Blaise on April 11, 2014 at 3:50 PM

http://tinyurl.com/ldcrsvo

(This is a c*n*n story. The MOD blocks their URLs.

davidk on April 11, 2014 at 3:51 PM

I want to know who inserted the language into the farm bill that is allowing them to do this. Lets find that out first, then democrat or republican… lets get that repealed. Call your congress critters today.

canditaylor68 on April 11, 2014 at 3:52 PM

Did Mary Grice support Prop 8?

Yankee Doodle on April 11, 2014 at 3:53 PM

Blaise on April 11, 2014 at 3:50 PM

That will only work until they come up with another scheme to take back what is “wrongfully” theirs!!

Deano1952 on April 11, 2014 at 3:56 PM

I’d like to know which politician(s) is/are responsible for slipping this into the law. They’re in no rush to reveal themselves, but I for one would like to know who is responsible for this little legal nugget of idiocy.

xNavigator on April 11, 2014

We need to know this and why the government is retroactively applying the new rule on old debts.

Shouldn’t we also be agitating to get that statute of limitations placed back into law?

JonPrichard on April 11, 2014 at 3:57 PM

For those commenting this is unconstitutional, or illegal, or whatever, that’s beside the point. We’ve clearly passed the stage where the rule of law has any objective meaning. This is just one more example of: whatever the bureaucrats decide is legal, just because. Unless it’s one of those rare cases that make it to the Supreme Court, and even then it’s a crap shoot.

Fenris on April 11, 2014 at 3:58 PM

Stupid question with this admin, I know, but … isn’t this unconstitutional? Once the statute expires, how can it be reinstated? Ex post facto?

Until members of this admin and federal bureaucracies such as the IRS and EPA are being televised perp-walking in cuffs to police vans for incarceration pending federal court dates, what difference does it make?

Bammy is the pResident. Nothing the pResident does personally or through his administration is illegal, or so I’ve heard.

/SNARK

hawkeye54 on April 11, 2014 at 3:59 PM

This is outrageous, but one solution might be to pay the exact taxes you owe, rather than overpay and then wait for a refund. Then they have nothing to sieze.

This has two other benefits. First nothing to claim against for ObamaCare penalty. Second, you would not be giving the government an interest-free loan.

Blaise on April 11, 2014 at 3:50 PM

I’ve been doing that for years. In fact I calculate it so I end up owing around $100.

Oldnuke on April 11, 2014 at 3:59 PM

We need to know this and why the government is retroactively applying the new rule on old debts.

Because they can, until someone proves they can’t and stops them.

hawkeye54 on April 11, 2014 at 4:00 PM

How can they demand restitution for a mistaken payment made in the late 1970s, let alone from someone who didn’t even receive it? Because: The farm bill that passed in 2011 lifted the 10-year statute of limitations on debts owed to the feds.

Nice job House GOP…so hot to get it on with the Farm Lobby you could not be bothered to find out what was in the bill, and if you did shame on you, by giving the U.S. executive branch (run by Obama of all people) more powers.

William Eaton on April 11, 2014 at 4:04 PM

So they are not responsible enough to get their own insurance but yet even when they are a minor years ago they are responsible for what their parents may have done.

This country is getting turned upside down more and more daily.

watertown on April 11, 2014 at 4:04 PM

but one solution might be to pay the exact taxes you owe, rather than overpay and then wait for a refund. Then they have nothing to sieze.

It once was that way for taxpayers. Checks written quarterly for the taxes owed, and no more. But someone got the government to believe taking withholding ahead of time would be far more beneficial and the government isn’t about to end a lucrative method of collecting revenue.

The IRS needs to be abolished. It has been proven a den of thugs, bullies,thieves and miscreants and an operative arm of a particular political party and needs to go.

hawkeye54 on April 11, 2014 at 4:05 PM

Stupid question with this admin, I know, but … isn’t this unconstitutional? Once the statute expires, how can it be reinstated? Ex post facto?

I think in a FARM BILL a year or 2 ago they removed this limitation so it can go back 100 years if they can prove it.

Yeah a FARM BILL they removed this restriction.

watertown on April 11, 2014 at 4:06 PM

Will this be happening if black or mexican/illegal people were
the victims of fed gubmint’s stupidity ?

burrata on April 11, 2014 at 4:08 PM

Hmmm. If I was Darrel Issa, I’d start looking for the SSA employees who are comparing parents’ Social Security debts with offsprings’ party affiliations.

Tyrone Slothrop on April 11, 2014 at 4:09 PM

Because: The farm bill that passed in 2011 lifted the 10-year statute of limitations on debts owed to the feds.

I’d like to know who slipped this piece of legislation into the Farm Bill of 2011.

Any way to find out?

portlandon on April 11, 2014 at 4:11 PM

It won’t be long now, and they’ll be after IRA’s, 401K’s, and just about everything else.

moo on April 11, 2014 at 3:29 PM

Yep, thieves.

Another (equally remote-we know that the PTB have never ever tossed this one around) possibility-coming after you for your parent’s/grandparent’s, sibling’s, cousin’s and children’s debts-credit cards, mortgages, student loans…someone’s gotta pay I tellya!

Debtor’s prisons and colonies far behind?

Dr. ZhivBlago on April 11, 2014 at 4:13 PM

Shakedown: Treasury now seizing tax refunds from adult children to pay parents’ decades-old Social Security debts

Oh! I’m sure this is just a few rogue agents in Omaha or something. Nobody will be madder than Obama when he reads about this in the WaPo.

Happy Nomad on April 11, 2014 at 4:14 PM

No wonder so many citizens are giving up their citizenship and passports…

PatriotRider on April 11, 2014 at 4:15 PM

Since there are filters and loopholes and rules and regulations in IRS so that terrorists and other scam artists do not profit off US taxpayers,
check this out :
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/04/10/IRS-Issued-4-billion-in-Bogus-Tax-Refunds-Last-Year
In just ONE year –

How much did the IRS mistakenly give to tax scam artists who cashed in on fraudulent tax returns last year? Would you believe almost $4 billion?

burrata on April 11, 2014 at 4:16 PM

Time to move to Costa Rica or Belize…the US is out of control…

PatriotRider on April 11, 2014 at 4:17 PM

As the saying goes:
If you pass enough laws, we’ll all be criminals.

Missilengr on April 11, 2014 at 3:42 PM

Linked to this in a comment the other “day, but it fits here, too.
“John Stossel’s Illegal Everything”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBiJB8YuDBQ

whatcat on April 11, 2014 at 4:18 PM

Because: The farm bill that passed in 2011 lifted the 10-year statute of limitations on debts owed to the feds.

So they had to pass it to find out what’s in it ?

burrata on April 11, 2014 at 4:18 PM

Currently Federal law requires states that participate in Medicaid to “recapture” Medicaid expenses from the beneficiary’s estate.

How soon will this be changed so that they can come after you for your parents’ and siblings’ Medicaid expenses also…

climbnjump on April 11, 2014 at 4:18 PM

The farm bill in question was actually passed in 2008 and the collection of these debts began in 2011. Vanceone above has it right. Bush vetoed this Democrat bill; but with the help of a few Republicans, the veto was overridden.

Steve Tsouloufis on April 11, 2014 at 4:19 PM

Treasury to average Joe…sign over your 401K because we said so…

PatriotRider on April 11, 2014 at 4:19 PM

So they are not responsible enough to get their own insurance but yet even when they are a minor years ago they are responsible for what their parents may have done.

This country is getting turned upside down more and more daily.

watertown on April 11, 2014 at 4:04 PM

It’s a function of every societal institution and government trying to wring every dollar out of citizens they can. At some point alumni of Herbert Hoover elementary school (or their estates) will be receiving bills for discrepancies following an audit of the milk money accounts.

Happy Nomad on April 11, 2014 at 4:20 PM

It won’t be long now, and they’ll be after IRA’s, 401K’s, and just about everything else.

moo on April 11, 2014 at 3:29 PM

Except Food Stamps, they are pretty much safe from any cuts, and the millions of Americans that cheat on Food Stamps are very rarely caught and if they are they get a very strict talking-to.

slickwillie2001 on April 11, 2014 at 4:21 PM

If your wealth is not in your physical possession, you don’t own it…

Buy silver and gold and screw the government…

PatriotRider on April 11, 2014 at 4:21 PM

SSA insists that they did send notice — to a P.O. Box that Grice hasn’t owned for 35 years, even though they have her current address.

Note, when you owe them something and they have no immediate source for recovery, they damned well know how to notify you. In contrast, when you owe them something and they do have an immediate source for recovery, they have no idea where to find you.

What in the phuck happened to due process–you know, notice and an opportunity to be heard?

BuckeyeSam on April 11, 2014 at 4:22 PM

Treasury to average Joe…sign over your 401K because we said so…

PatriotRider on April 11, 2014 at 4:19 PM

The thing is: they don’t even bother to ask, they just take it.

whatcat on April 11, 2014 at 4:24 PM

The government is at war with the people.

GaltBlvnAtty on April 11, 2014 at 3:43 PM

And we can’t find one GOP figure in Washington to say it or to even act like they understand it.

rrpjr on April 11, 2014 at 4:26 PM

The IRS needs to be abolished…

hawkeye54 on April 11, 2014 at 4:05 PM

Why stop at the IRS? The whole friggin’ government is out of control. I don’t advocate a*r*m*e*d insurr3ction, but something’s got to be done. We can start by getting rid of Hairy Greed in 2014, Obysmal will be gone in 2017 (hopefully), along with other criminals in his administration. We need to replace them with some decent Conservatives (please, not Jeb Bush).

This is just getting too ridiculous.

NOMOBO on April 11, 2014 at 4:27 PM

I smell backlash.

We need the exacts facts on the enactment of this legislation. I’ve seen two dates of enactment: 2008 under Bush by Dem override, with a deferred effective date (naturally), and 2011.

Anyone have a definitive answer? If the former, it should be laid squarely at the Dem’s feet as the war on the middle class.

BuckeyeSam on April 11, 2014 at 4:28 PM

It’s almost like King Barky the Incompetent WANTS an armed uprising before 2017. Nah Obama would never want martial law so he could become a dictator. Although if that were to happen Obama would think he is the best guy to be our first total dictator.

jukin3 on April 11, 2014 at 4:29 PM

Exit question from Karl: Isn’t holding children responsible for their parents’ retirement debts the governing model of the Democratic Party?

Responsibility for thee, but not for me…

ted c on April 11, 2014 at 4:29 PM

Time to move to Costa Rica or Belize…the US is out of control…

PatriotRider on April 11, 2014 at 4:17 PM

And what makes you think they’re immune from all this?

Dr. ZhivBlago on April 11, 2014 at 4:29 PM

Unlimited power, baby.

Hey.. just go ahead and arrest the children for the sins of the fathers too! Dad committed a crime against the state and died before he was brought to justice? Arrest the family and throw them in jail.

Why does this remind me if North Korea?

JellyToast on April 11, 2014 at 4:31 PM

Time to change my withholding – I’m supposed to be getting way too much of a refund – and my dad died a little over a year ago.
No telling what financial mistakes he might have made in his 85 years.

dentarthurdent on April 11, 2014 at 4:33 PM

A lot of people have a strong belief in the idea that law is a kind of leveler, an institution that is supposed to regard everyone as equal. At some point though, the law simply becomes the will of the tyrant.

An almost religious reverence for “the rule of law” is a hard thing to overcome. It’s encouraging that people are starting to question some of these long held beliefs.

Another Libertarian on April 11, 2014 at 4:33 PM

What in the phuck happened to due process–you know, notice and an opportunity to be heard?

BuckeyeSam on April 11, 2014 at 4:22 PM

Don’t be silly. Due process is for countries that have laws and a properly functioning judicial system. That’s not us.

climbnjump on April 11, 2014 at 4:36 PM

The government is at war with the people.

GaltBlvnAtty on April 11, 2014 at 3:43 PM

And we can’t find one GOP figure in Washington to say it or to even act like they understand it.

rrpjr on April 11, 2014 at 4:26 PM

These two posts pretty much sum up everything wrong in America.

ToddPA on April 11, 2014 at 4:37 PM

This, from the same people who brought you “At this point, what difference does it make?”, less than 12 months after multiple homicide by terrorists.

Of course, you can’t get Social Security or Federal income tax refunds from al Qaeda, so…

orangemtl on April 11, 2014 at 4:39 PM

When illegal aliens get amnesty will their wages be garnished or accounts levied to pay this money back?

Wigglesworth on April 11, 2014 at 4:40 PM

Although if that were to happen Obama would think he is the best guy to be our first total dictator.

jukin3 on April 11, 2014 at 4:29 PM

Well, his core “civilian security force” (Stormtroopers) from the BLM and NPS are already getting in some more practice in Nevada, to add to their practice from the gubmint shutdown.

“You have been deemed hazardous. Will you comply?”

dentarthurdent on April 11, 2014 at 4:45 PM

Next…Debtors Prisons

workingclass artist on April 11, 2014 at 4:47 PM

These are from two comments by Wearyman in the Headlines. He spent some time doing research. My emphasis.

And the section in question that was added in:

SEC. 14219. ELIMINATION OF STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS APPLICABLE TO COLLECTION OF DEBT BY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFSET.

(a) Elimination.–Section 3716(e) of title 31, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
“(e)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, regulation, or administrative limitation, no limitation on the period within which an offset may be initiated or taken pursuant to this section shall be effective.

[[Page 122 STAT. 2245]]

“(2) This section does not apply when a statute explicitly prohibits using administrative offset or setoff to collect the claim or type of claim involved.”.
(b) Application of Amendment.–The amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply to any debt outstanding on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.

and

The bill in question was The “Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008’’, Public Law 110-246, passed on June 18th, 2008 by Veto Override.

President Bush Vetoed this bill, citing riders like the one noted in this article as the reason why. The Democrat controlled Congress overrode him by a 2/3rds majority vote.

Here is a link to a PDF copy of the law: http://www.ers.usda.gov/media/356893/getdoc.pdf

The added section in question is Sec. 14219. Just search for that on the PDF and you can read it.

The law was originally Bill H.R. 6124, Sponsored by Collin Peterson, a Democrat from Minnesota.

If you go to this link: https://agriculture.house.gov/bill/hr-6124-food-conservation-and-energy-act-2008 You can see the roll call vote, both on the original bill, and then the Veto Override.

You will also be able to see all the formal amendments.

The problem is that this was added as an a appropriation, so there is no written record of who requested it on the bill. Appropriations can be slipped into a bill, and just have to be authorized by the Senate Appropriations Committee.

At that time, The Senate Appropriations Committe was headed up by former KKK Grand Dragon Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WVa). The Agriculture subcommittee was headed up by Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wis).

However, I was unable to find the specific person who inserted this particular rider into the bill.

INC on April 11, 2014 at 4:51 PM

The proper party for the Treasury to go after is the ESTATE of the parent.

A minor child could not have consented to the indebtedness; thus, there is no contract between the now-adult child and the government.

This is bullshit.

Resist We Much on April 11, 2014 at 4:55 PM

Just wait until the Fed’s send newly armed HHS officials after the children of Medicaid/Medicare recipients for health care expenses incurred under Obamacare….

ThePainfulTruth on April 11, 2014 at 5:05 PM

I just remembered that there was a judge in AZ who was supposed to rule against Hussein ‘s dacoity in a similar case ,
but he was assassinated before he could do that .
Hmmmm….

burrata on April 11, 2014 at 5:15 PM

Next…Debtors Prisons

workingclass artist on April 11, 2014 at 4:47 PM

Yes – for debts your ancestors may have rung up….

dentarthurdent on April 11, 2014 at 5:21 PM

Just wait until the Fed’s send newly armed HHS officials after the children of Medicaid/Medicare recipients for health care expenses incurred under Obamacare….

ThePainfulTruth on April 11, 2014 at 5:05 PM

Does 0bamacare cover medical expenses required to treat hollow point bullet wounds?

dentarthurdent on April 11, 2014 at 5:22 PM

Is Dingy Harry Behind The Seige At The Bundy Ranch?
Check out the picture.

Resist We Much on April 11, 2014 at 5:21 PM

Well, for one thing, every soldier in that photo is carrying a wood stock AK-47 (or AK-74), so I tend to doubt that pic involves any US military or LEO.

dentarthurdent on April 11, 2014 at 5:25 PM

Yet, the Feds have absolutely no problem spending $4 billion annually on the (real or factious) children of illegal immigrants through Earned Income Tax Credits.

Obviously, Mary Grice is a non-Hispanic white woman.

bw222 on April 11, 2014 at 5:28 PM

Is Dingy Harry Behind The Seige At The Bundy Ranch?
Check out the picture.

Resist We Much on April 11, 2014 at 5:21 PM

And the terrain and foliage are not even close to what’s in the Nevada desert where the ranch standoff is happening.

dentarthurdent on April 11, 2014 at 5:29 PM

A concrete demonstration of what government failure will do in the long run: Indebt our descendants for government mistakes and generosity of today.

Axeman on April 11, 2014 at 5:31 PM

And where do they get off withholding State income tax refunds? These are not State debts. Sound like yet another case for the States to launch some lawsuits against the Feds. Again.

ss396 on April 11, 2014 at 3:28 PM

I’ll give you a hint. He wrote something and perhaps called somebody….He’s got a pen and a phone….

Axeman on April 11, 2014 at 5:32 PM

The Treasury Department has intercepted $1.9 billion in tax refunds already this year — $75 million of that on debts delinquent for more than 10 years, said Jeffrey Schramek, assistant commissioner of the department’s debt management service. The aggressive effort to collect old debts started three years ago — the result of a single sentence tucked into the farm bill lifting the 10-year statute of limitations on old debts to Uncle Sam.

It seems to me that this is an ex-post-facto law of precisely the kind prohibited by the Constitution. For you to suddenly be on the hook for a debt incurred by someone else years ago, and for which the statute of limitations had passed, is something that begs to be resolved some place other than in Tax Court.

unclesmrgol on April 11, 2014 at 5:36 PM

Anyone call illegal alien rules yet?

rogerb on April 11, 2014 at 5:38 PM

Well, for one thing, every soldier in that photo is carrying a wood stock AK-47 (or AK-74), so I tend to doubt that pic involves any US military or LEO.

dentarthurdent on April 11, 2014 at 5:25 PM

And the terrain and foliage are not even close to what’s in the Nevada desert where the ranch standoff is happening.

dentarthurdent on April 11, 2014 at 5:29 PM

Thanks. I replaced it with several new pictures from news stations in NV.

http://predicthistunpredictpast.blogspot.com/2014/04/is-dingy-harry-behind-seige-at-bundy.html

Resist We Much on April 11, 2014 at 5:45 PM

unclesmrgol on April 11, 2014 at 5:36 PM

You’re right, and it should be challenged – but given the costs of litigation, people will simply pony up the few hundred.

What should really happen is Congress should repeal this “tucked-in” sentence, instead of acting like everyone’s powerless to do anything about it.

Hell, for that matter, Obama could issue an executive order stopping the practice – it’s far less overreach than any of his other executive orders.

notropis on April 11, 2014 at 5:48 PM

Thanks. I replaced it with several new pictures from news stations in NV.

http://predicthistunpredictpast.blogspot.com/2014/04/is-dingy-harry-behind-seige-at-bundy.html

Resist We Much on April 11, 2014 at 5:45 PM

Much better.

If Infowars is using photos of Russian soldiers (or other nationality that uses Russian weapons) for stories on the Nevada ranch situation, they’re going to destroy ANY remaining shred of credibility they might have. Just as bad as the DNC using photos of Russian warships…

dentarthurdent on April 11, 2014 at 5:49 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3