Tag: Exclusion

Ask Amy: Wedding brings on in-law exclusion

Kate included Julie in her wedding party several years ago.

Kate can think of nothing that would have offended Julie.

How should Kate handle this upcoming wedding?

Sad Aunt: In the movie version, “Kate” would attend the wedding, get roaring drunk at the reception, and then deliver the roasty-toast of the century.

Movie pitch aside, if every sibling and spouse has been included in the wedding party, this exclusion does seem off-kilter. However, the fact that Kate included “Julie” in her own wedding does not obligate Julie to recipro-kate.

Ideally, Julie would have anticipated this challenge and explained her decision to Kate — gently and respectfully — in advance of her announcement.

Kate might be able to tease out a gracious explanation by asking Julie, “I accept your decision not to ask me to be part of the wedding party, but I want to make sure — are you and I okay?”

She should add, “Please, let me know if there is any way I can be helpful as you get closer to the date.”

Kate should attend this wedding, be a gracious guest and have a good time.

Dear Amy: Every summer and fall, family members gather at a beach house about an hour from my home.

Because there are not enough bedrooms in the house, my husband and I sleep in an open loft, just above the kitchen and living room.

I’m a light sleeper, and I get only a few hours of shut-eye, due to the natural activity from both the night owls and children rising early.

With chronic health conditions, I’d prefer to sleep in my own home and return to the beach house for day and evening activities, but I’m afraid this would be seen as rude.

Family is important, but so is my health. What do you recommend?

Sleep-Deprived: You are responsible for taking care of yourself and seeing to your own needs. No one else can do that for you.

You have two reasonable choices: To ask for a bedroom with a door, or to drive home each night.

I cannot imagine that anyone would be affronted if — after many years — you decided to make a change and stop sleeping in the loft.

In fact, if you chose to return to your home and sleep in your own bed each night, your fellow family members might actually be happy to have more sleeping space available in the group house. And you could show up in the mornings with fresh bagels/doughnuts/coffee for the group.

Just make sure you aren’t tired and/or inebriated when you drive home.

Dear Amy: Responding to “Red Faced Friends,” who worried about people bringing gifts to a “no gifts” party — on my 80th birthday, my wife invited more than 100 friends and relatives to my party.

Knowing that most all of them would bring a gift (even though told NOT TO on the invitations), I asked them to bring a new unwrapped children’s toy, which they all

Continue reading

Nearly 85,000 Inmates Entitled to Stimulus Checks; Judge Finds Exclusion Is ‘Likely Contrary to Law’

After the Internal Revenue Service deemed incarcerated individuals ineligible for a stimulus check, a judge found the agency was most likely doing so against the law and ruled it must reissue payments that were previously denied or forcibly returned.

text, letter: President Donald Trump's name appears on the coronavirus economic assistance checks that were sent to citizens across the country April 29 in Washington, D.C. On September 24, a judge ruled that incarcerated individuals otherwise eligible for a payment cannot have their payments withheld.

© Chip Somodevilla/Getty
President Donald Trump’s name appears on the coronavirus economic assistance checks that were sent to citizens across the country April 29 in Washington, D.C. On September 24, a judge ruled that incarcerated individuals otherwise eligible for a payment cannot have their payments withheld.

Nearly 85,000 incarcerated individuals received payments worth $100 million, according to a report from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA). After issuing the payments, the IRS instructed anyone who received them to either repay the direct deposit or return the voided check, as they were made in error. But the federal judge ruled on September 24 that incarceration status doesn’t disqualify a person from receiving a stimulus check.


Load Error

The Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act, which was passed unanimously in Congress and was signed into law in March, provided for $1,200 payments to individuals and $2,400 to joint filers. Aside from the income threshold, the CARES Act identified an “eligible individual” as anyone other than a “nonresident alien individual,” a person who is claimed as a dependent on another person’s tax return, or a trust or estate.

“Incarcerated persons who otherwise qualify for an advance refund are not excluded as an ‘eligible individual,'” U.S. District Judge Phyllis Hamilton wrote in her ruling. “The IRS’s decision to exclude incarcerated persons from advance refund payments is likely contrary to law.”

Hamilton’s ruling came about three months after a lawsuit was filed on behalf of Colin Scholl and Lisa Strawn challenging the IRS’ decision to deem incarcerated individuals ineligible for payments. In it, they requested class status for those who were incarcerated from March 27 and an injunction requiring the IRS to automatically issue payments to those incarcerated people who are eligible. Along with the injunction, Hamilton also granted the plaintiffs’ the class status.

HEROES vs. HEALS Act: How Stimulus Packages Differ Ahead Of Second Coronavirus Relief Aid



This isn’t the first time the issue of whether incarcerated individuals qualify for a stimulus check has arisen. In 2009, stimulus checks worth $250 were sent to some incarcerated individuals as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). Of the 3,900 incarcerated individuals who received payments, 2,200 of them got to keep their checks because the law contained language allowing them to, the Associated Press reported at the time.

Under ARRA, people receiving certain federal benefits were eligible for a payment if they received the benefit within the three months before the package’s enactment. While incarcerated people are generally ineligible for federal benefits, if a person wasn’t incarcerated in the three months before the package’s enactment, he or she would have still been eligible for a stimulus check, Mark Lassiter, a spokesman for the Social Security Administration,

Continue reading