As featured in The Wall Street Journal, Money Magazine, and more!
     

Economic Stimulus Tax Rebate Calculator

This article was written by in Economy. 336 comments.


Welcome! If you’re new here, please consider subscribing to the Consumerism Commentary RSS feed!

This article is for tax year 2008. For 2009 and beyond, see our roundup of 8 (or more) Ways to Benefit from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (AKA Stimulus Plan).

Updated March 18, 2008 with an estimated schedule of payments.

President Bush has signed into law a $165 billion economic stimulus package providing rebate checks to taxpayers. You might receive a check for $300, $600, $1,200, or even more depending on your conditions.

Originally, PBS Newshour provided a calculator to help taxpayers to determine the amount of the rebate, but that calculator has been proven to be faulty. With the help of Consumerism Commentary reader cdg, I’m now including a new calculator, revised several times over the past few days to increase clarity and accuracy. This calculator properly takes into account the information from the bill passed by Congress and signed into law by the President (H.R.5140) and has been verified by CPAs and tax accountants. However, any information presented should not be considered tax advice.

The validity of the result depends on the accuracy of the information you enter. Before entering the data or asking any questions, please scroll the calculator down to read the definitions and read all the comments at the bottom of this post.


TurboTax is Easy, Free Edition, Fast Refund

Since this “rebate” is an advance for a new credit which will be included on the 2008 1040 income tax form, it will not affect your 2007 taxes. In April 2008 (this year for 2007′s tax settlement), you will receive what you are owed or you will have to pay what you owe as if the rebate never occurred.

This summer you will receive the rebate for the 2008 credit as calculated above.

In April 2009 or thereabouts, when you file your taxes for 2008, the IRS will run the calculation for the stimulus rebate credit again. If the results show that you would have received more (due to an additional child, for instance), you will be sent the difference. If your results show that you would have received a smaller rebate, then you get to keep the difference. This is an additional credit. You do not have to pay back to the IRS what you will receive this summer. Receiving this advance will not reduce next year’s refund nor will you owe more federal tax.

March 18 Update: The IRS has released a schedule estimating when you will receive your rebate.

Updated March 21, 2011 and originally published January 28, 2008. If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to the RSS feed or receive daily emails. Follow @ConsumerismComm on Twitter and visit our Facebook page for more updates.

Email Email Print Print
avatar
Points: ♦127,475
Rank: Platinum
About the author

Luke Landes, also known as Flexo, is the founder of Consumerism Commentary. He has been blogging and writing for the internet since 1995 and has been building online communities since 1991. Find out more about him and follow Luke Landes on Twitter. View all articles by .

{ 336 comments… read them below or add one }

avatar Jim

China will really appreciate this. It will help their economy

Reply to this comment

avatar cdg

To #91 by checho:
================
If the IRS audits you, they can request proof of your marital status, and the date of your marriage. Failing that, they can always look at the county records. Never assume that the IRS won’t find out. They have extra-constitutional investigatory powers, because they can always bully a bank manager, doctor, country clerk, etc. into violating privacy laws, lest he/she too be audited.

To #93 by Toby:
==============
I added line number references because many people were misunderstanding the various terms. Note that I don’t say the number of dependents from Line 6c, but rather the number of qualified children from Line 6c. There is a check box for qualified children. I assume that you have the instructions for Line 6c in your 1040, 1040A, or 1949EZ booklet. Furthermore, I explain this line in more detail in the insructions.

Thank you for the suggestion regarding simplifying the computation of net tax liability. I think I may incorporate it. Check back later.

The calculator yields $1200 when I enter the figures you mention. There may have been a bug in an earlier version.

To #95 by Toby:
===============
You say that when you “enter the information from my list and leave the net income tax liability blank, I get $1,200. If I enter $0 in net income tax liability, I get $0.” I cannot reproduce your results. However, there was a “bug” in the earlier version (fixed Friday) that if you entered commas, everything following the comma would be ignored. Thus the calculator saw “1,200″ as “1″. That is why it said in BOLD type at the top of the calculator to NOT enter commas. I have fixed this problem, and you may enter commas now — if you are using the current version of the calculator on my web page. If you are linked to an older version (copied to someone else’s web page), you may get different results.

Because I was requested that the calculator fit in a small frame size, there is a limit to the amount of line number reference and other instructions that can be provided next to the input fields. I assume that someone who doesn’t know what “qualified child” means will “see below” as instructed. Furthermore, there is considerable additional criteria to being a “qualified child” than just being under 17 at the end of the calendar year.

To #97 by Grandmother:
======================
If you want to get a rebate, you will have to file a return. You will not get a refund, but you MAY get a rebate.

To #98 by Helper:
=================
For purposes of the rebate, SSI benefits are NOT qualified income, as stated very clearly in the instructions. If that is your brother’s only income, there is no reason for him to file a tax return, as he will not received a rebate. It would be a waste of time, but it would only “be opening a can of worms” if he filled out the tax return improperly, for example by declaring his SSI benefits as taxable income.

To #99 by Helper
================
SSDI benefits ARE qualified income for the rebate. Your brother should file a tax return showing the $12,000 SSDI income, and showing NONE of it as taxable. He will not have to pay income tax, nor will he receive a refund (since nothing has been withheld), but he will qualify for a $300 rebate.

Supposedly, the IRS will co-ordinate with the Social Security Administration, and send rebates to those receiving social security benefits without them having to file a return, but it is probably safer to file the return, and be on both “rebate” lists. You won’t get two rebates, but you will be assured of getting one.

To #100 by Toby:
================
Your examples of what you term “flaws” indicate the calculator is performing correctly. The rebate amount is the LESSER of net tax liability or $600 ($1200 for married couples filing jointly). If and ONLY if, the “taxpayer” has $3000 in qualified income (earned income, social security benefits, veterans benefits) OR (an AGI GREATER than the basic standard deductions plus one exemption (two exemptions for married couples filing jointly) AND net taxable income greater than $1), they qualify for the minimum rebate amount ($300 or $600) plus $300 per child. If they do not meet the aforementioned criteria, they do not qualify for the minimum rebate, or the additional $300 per child. See IRC Section 6428(b)(2) as modified by HR 5140. This is also clearly stated in the instructions.

Reply to this comment

avatar SANDA B

MY MOTHER-IN -LAW RECIEVES SOCIAL SECURITY ONLY, DOES SHE NEED TO FILE TAXES THIS YEAR TO RECIEVE THE REBATE. OR WILL THEY SENT $300.00 TO ALL SS RECIEVERS.

Reply to this comment

avatar cdg

To #103 by SANDA B (reply)

The latest information from the IRS indicates that low-income taxpayers who are not otherwise required to file taxes, MUST file a 2007 tax return to receive the rebate. There was some talk earlier about them coordinating with the Social Security Administration so that beneficiaries would not have to file returns, but they IRS decided it was less work (for them) to make the “taxpayer” do all the work.

This is actually quite a reasonable position. It will cost the IRS (and thus the taxpayers) billions to issue these refunds. If they can save a few billion dollars, it will benefit everyone.

Conversely, low-income taxpayers will be getting a “rebate” of (at least) $300, even though they paid no taxes! So why not have them file a return, even if they have to pay a tax preparer to fill out the return?

I’m certain that there will be many volunteer agencies to help senior citizens prepare their first tax return in many years, so it won’t cost you anything but time, and a postage stamp. You can even e-file online for free and save the stamp (if you want to spend 10 times as much time doing your return).

Reply to this comment

avatar Jim

I thought you needed to earn at least $3000 dollars of wages or Soial Security to get a rebate. I checked other in the calulator for being single and left everything blank except for the AGI line 57 form 1040, and entered $14,000 dollars. I put $525 in the Tax liability and it calulated a rebate of $525. The $14,000 dollars is interest income from bank CD’s

Reply to this comment

avatar Jim

In the above comment #105, I meant line 37 form 1040 for the AGI

Reply to this comment

avatar Toby

To #102 by cdg
Single with $10,000 AGI and a tax liability of $125 meets the requirements of AGI being greater than the standard deduction of $5,350 plus one exemption of $3,400 with at least $1 of tax liability and would qualify for a minimum rebate of $300. The calculator spits out $125 if you plug those numbers in.

To #105 by Jim
For single the standard deduction is $5,350 and one exemption is $3,400 for a total of $8,750. Since your AGI meets the requirement of being greater than this with a tax liability greater than zero your rebate would be your tax liability of $525.

Reply to this comment

avatar cdg

To #105 by Jim:

The computation of the “rebate” is described in the footnotes. A link to the “rebate” legislation is also provided. Read it.

You paid $525 in taxes which is less than the $600 maximum for single individuals, so you get the entire amount back.

The $3000 only comes into play when your tax liability is less than $300, in which case you would receive a government handout of $300 of someone else’s money.

Reply to this comment

avatar Toby

cdg, it looks like your were counting $10,700 as the standard deduction for both single and married filing joint. The standard deduction is $5,350 single or $10,700 married filing jointly. If you think about it, tax liability, or line 57 on a 1040 won’t ever be above 0 if AGI is less than the standard deduction plus exemptions. Since the minimum rebate is $300, it seems like the calculator should change any rebate under $300 to zero.

Reply to this comment

avatar cdg

To #107 and 109 by Toby:

Good catch. I was using 10,700 for everyone. I am working on it now, because it is different for all 5 filing status, and I have to change “other” to each status. Give me about an hour.

To Flexo:

Why do I get a “page not found” for about ten minutes after I post a message? This prevents me from posting another right away, as in the above case.

Reply to this comment

avatar Toby

I wasn’t trying to rip your calculator, I was just trying to help you get it to where it will give the right rebate for all 28 scenarios on the IRS website. It’s cool if you want to create an option for each filing status, but it seems to me no matter what filing status you have, if you have any tax liability, you meet the requirement of AGI being greater than standard deduction plus exemption.

Kiplinger is trying to say that tax liability is line 57 of Form 1040, line 35 of 1040A or line 10 of 1040EZ; add to the amount on that line the total you claimed for the child credit or earned income credit.

That doesn’t seem right. As far as I understand you only add the child tax credit to line 57, not earned income credit or additional child tax credit.

Reply to this comment

avatar cdg

To #111 by Toby:

I said good catch and I meant it. I didn’t notice it, and neither did over 332 CPAs who have used the calculator so far (or if they noticed, they didn’t bother to inform me).

The data on the IRS website is not necessarily accurate. They just posted it recently, and the IRS tends to make a lot of mistakes, and (sometimes) correct them later.

Your premise (that if you have any tax liability, you meet the requirement of AGI being greater than standard deduction plus exemption) may be true, but I would rather do the computation the way it is specified in the tax bill than rely on a premise that might overlook something. I already made that mistake several times :)

I believe Kiplinger is in error. The definition of “net tax liability” that I am using was based on discussions with several CPAs.

Reply to this comment

avatar sunnydays

Well darn those folks that made over $97,000 in 2007! They paid no Social Security Taxes on anything over that amount while the rest of us paid on 100% of our incomes! Let the majority of us who do not earn anywhere near $97,000 benefit for once!

Reply to this comment

avatar cdg

To Toby:

The calculator now gets the same results as the 28 IRS examples, so I guess the IRS got it right. :)

The IRS website also defines net taxable income the way we do (Line 57 + child tax credit). Thus Kiplinger is in error.

Reply to this comment

avatar Toby

This is definitely the most accurate rebate calculator on the Internet. The only reason I can think of that none of the CPAs caught this is because it’s probably not common to have an AGI greater than the standard deduction plus exemptions when your earned income is less than $3,000.

Reply to this comment

avatar Rick

My wife & I had no wage income in 2007 (1040, line 7)but did have Pension (line16) and rental income (self storage Business), line 17. Are these sources of income considered “earned income” for the purpose of receiving rebates?

Reply to this comment

avatar Janet

I am deeply concerned that we need to borrow money from China to have this so called rebate, and but yet we can send 1.4 billion dollars to Mexico to help them secure their borders, now, I am rocket Scientist, but it seems to me that 1.4 billion dollars would employee a lot of American people to guard our own borders and to complete the fencing that they say we don’t have enough funding to complete. Look at the retirement benefits a person receives for being a Congressman who approved that, not you or I , we didn’t even get to vote on it. Remember the year they raised their income by 33%, when was the last time you or I got a raise who 33%? The average person annual raise is usually 3 to 5 percent, look at the retirement of the average person. When are we going to have the correct people in our Congress and the White House who is really looking out for our best interest? I can answer that for you. It will be when we the people of the United States take the monetary value out of being a Politician. Then and only then will we have the kind of people who care about this Country in control again. My parents taught me that I do not borrow from Peter to Pay Paul. Putting your needs before your wants is the way to keep control over your financial situation. I don’t think our government is doing the will of the people any more, and I don’t think they have for a very long time. 1.4 to Mexico to help control the border? I say it’s a pay off to the drug cartel to keep them out of the US.

Reply to this comment

avatar Toby

Rick I believe pension and rental are not considered earned income. Even with zero earned income, you should receive a rebate if you AGI is above $17,500 and you had at least $1 on line 57 of the 1040.

Reply to this comment

avatar cdg

To #116 by Rick:

What part of “Earned Income (see definition below)” or the instructions that appear under “earned income” below are unclear?

Pension income is NOT earned income.

Rental income MAY be earned income or investment income, depending whether or not it is your “business” or simply an investment. This is discussed in detail in the 1040 instructions, and in several of the IRS publications.

However, if property rental IS your business, you should be paying self-employment tax (the equivalent of the 7.65% FICA tax imposed on an employee AND his employer, for a total of 15.3%) on your rental income.

When the IRS calculates your “qualified income” to determine your “rebate” amount, they will include business, farm, partnership and rental incomes only if you include them on Schedule SE.

You should consult your tax adviser to help determine if your rental income is earned income.

Reply to this comment

avatar Amanda

This rebate is great. WHAT I CANT STAND IS THOES PEOPLE THAT MAKE MORE THEN $40,000 A YEAR HAVE SOMETHING TO COMPLAIN ABOUT. I LIVE IN THE LITTLE STATE OF N.D. AND IF YOU ARE MAKEING THAT KIND OF MONEY YOU ARE PRACTICALLY RICH. WHAT DO YOU PEOPLE HAVE TO COMPLAINE ABOUT I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO KNOW. I WORK HARD SO DOES MY HUSBAND AND WE HAVE 3 KIDS AND ARE WORRIED EVERY MONTH ABOUT GETTING SOMETING SHUT OFF. I THINK IF YOU MAKE ALOT OF MONEY YOU SHOULD SHUT UP AND ENJOY IT. I M SO SICK AND TIRED OF HEARING RICH PEOPLE COMPLAIN ABOUT HOW MUCH MORE MONEY THEY COULD HAVE. WELL COME TRY TO BE US FOR A DAY AND THEN LET ME HERE YOU COMPLAINE. UNTILL THEN SHUT UP FOR GOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reply to this comment

avatar cdg

To Amanda:

You obviously don’t know what you are talking about. Just because someone makes more money than you doesn’t give you the right to take their money or property. Perhaps they work MUCH harder than you. Perhaps they are more talented. Perhaps they are smarter. Perhaps they contribute more.

And perhaps, as you apparently assume, they inherited their money, never worked a day in their life, and spend all their time finding ways to spend other peoples’ money (in which case they are probably hypocritical rich Democrats, like the Kennedy’s, Kerry’s, Edwards’, Gores, and most of Hollywood).

This “rebate” (as the media calls it) is NOT a rebate at all. It is primarily a hand-out of other people’s money to people who pay little or no taxes. Nor is it an “economic stimulus” package, as it is too little and too late to prevent a recession, and Congress knows this.

The ONLY purpose of the “economic stimulus payments” are to make stupid people such as yourself think the politicians are doing something good for you, so you will vote for them again even during the recession they caused with their misguided economic policies. In other words, “the “rebate” is nothing but payola, bribery, and chicanery.

If you think someone making $40,000 a year is rich, you need a reality check. Even your fellow commies have defined “being rich” as making over $75,000 per year ($150,000 if married filing jointly).

Maybe you can live on less in North Dakota, but that won’t even pay your rent in a slum tenement in New York City. Furthermore, if you are making less than $40,000 with a spouse and 3 children, I suspect you are getting food stamps, perhaps welfare payments, and subsidized medical care (which us “rich folk” have to pay a fortune for).

So how can you compare **your** cost of living with someone who lives elsewhere and actually works for their money?

Furthermore, the person living in high cost-of-living areas such as NYC, San Francisco, Los Angeles, etc. pays much higher income and property taxes than the person living in ####### ND, thus increasing his/her cost of living even more. Would you like to pay $10,000 a year property taxes or lose your home?

**I’M** SICK AND TIRED OF HEARING PEOPLE LIKE **YOURSELF** JUSTIFYING STEALING MONEY AND PROPERTY FROM ANYONE WHO MAKES MORE THAN YOU, AND REDISTRIBUTING IT TO THE “NEEDY” (AFTER THE RICH DEMOCRATIC POLITICIANS TAKE THEIR CUT, OF COURSE).

WEALTHY PEOPLE CONTRIBUTE FAR MORE TO THE COUNTRY THAN YOU DO!

WHO DO YOU THINK PAYS THE TAXES THAT SUPPORT PEOPLE LIKE YOURSELF AND ALL THE GOVERNMENT GIVE-AWAY PROGRAMS THAT PEOPLE LIKE YOURSELF INSIST ON?

WHO DO YOU THINK PAYS THE TAXES THAT PROVIDE **YOU** WITH POLICE, FIRE, AMBULANCE, HOSPITAL, ROADS, LEGAL AID, AND NATIONAL DEFENSE?

WHO DO YOU THINK PROVIDES THE INVESTMENT CAPITAL THAT CREATES REAL JOBS FOR PEOPLE WHO WANT TO WORK?

WHO DO YOU THINK DONATES GENEROUSLY TO CHARITIES, SO THAT WE CAN HAVE MUSEUMS, OPERA, CONCERTS, THEATRE, PARKS, PLAYGROUNDS, SCHOOLS, COLLEGES, ETC.?

WHO DO YOU THINK FUNDS THE RED CROSS, UNITED WAY, HOPE, AND ALL THE OTHER CHARITIES THAT COME TO YOUR ASSISTANCE WHEN YOU NEED HELP?

IF YOU WANT TO LIVE IN A SOCIALIST COUNTRY, WHERE ALL THE WEALTH IS STOLEN FROM THOSE WHO PRODUCE, AND (AFTER THE POLITICIANS TAKE THEIR CUT) DISTRIBUTED AMONGST THOSE WHO DON’T PRODUCE, MOVE TO RUSSIA, CHINA, CUBA, OR ANY OF THE OTHER WONDERLANDS THAT THE UNITED STATES KEEPS BAILING OUT RATHER THAN LETTING THEM STARVE, SO THEY CAN USE OUR MONEY TO SUPPORT TERRORISTS.

IF YOU WANT TO LIVE IN AMERICA, LEARN TO BE GRATEFUL FOR WHAT YOU HAVE, AND FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO EARN MORE THROUGH HARD WORK AND INVESTMENT (ASSUMING THE DEMOCRATS LET YOU KEEP ANY OF IT). STOP TRYING TO TURN AMERICA INTO RUSSIA.

WHEN I WAS YOUNGER AND MADE A DECENT LIVING, THE GOVERNMENT TOOK MORE THAN HALF OF MY EARNINGS. YET I GAVE OVER HALF OF WHAT WAS LEFT TO CHARITY. NOW THAT I AM OLD AND SICKLY AND UNABLE TO WORK I LIVE VERY PRUDENTLY ON A FRACTION OF WHAT I USE TO EARN. BUT I STILL GIVE OVER 10% TO CHARITY. CAN YOU SAY THE SAME?

YOU COMPLAIN THAT YOU’RE CONSTANTLY WORRIED ABOUT SOMETHING BEING SHUT OFF? ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT GAS, ELECTRIC, AND WATER, OR ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT YOUR $100 A MONTH CABLE BILL? HOW OFTEN DO YOU DINE OUT OR BUY EXPENSIVE GROCERIES, RATHER THAN ECONOMIZING BY EATING RICE AND BEANS AND HOME GROWN VEGETABLES? DO YOU INSIST ON DRIVING A LATE MODEL CAR, OR DO YOU SAVE YOUR MONEY UNTIL YOU CAN AFFORD TO PAY CASH FOR A NEW ONE? ETC.

HOW DO YOU THINK “RICH” PEOPLE GET RICH? THEY WORK HARD, SAVE (WHAT THE GOVERNMENT DOESN’T STEAL), INVEST WISELY, AND DO WITH OUT LUXURIES UNTIL THEY ARE IN A FINANCIAL POSITION TO AFFORD THEM. THEY DON’T RUN UP HUGE CREDIT CARD DEBT, AND THEN SKIP TOWN OWING EVERYONE MONEY.

To paraphrase your closing sentence, TRY TO BE **US** FOR A DAY. UNTIL THEN **YOU** SHUT UP FOR GOOD. PLEASE.

Reply to this comment

avatar Jim

The minimun of $3000 is for a single person to get $300, so would a married couple filing jointly need a combine total minimum of $6000 in order to get $600?

Reply to this comment

avatar cdg

To #122 by Jim:

The $3,000 “qualified income” threshold is the same for single *and* married taxpayers, as stated clearly in the legislation, and even more clearly in the footnotes to the calculator — which I included so you wouldn’t have to ask questions that have already been answered. :)

To Flexo: Perhaps you could put a note above or below the calculator stating: “Please read the footnotes to see if your question has already been answered.” :)

Reply to this comment

avatar Jim

Your #121 comment was very well put. I don’t make much , but I buget my expenses and get along fine. I don’t buy things that I can’t afford, and usually save and pay cash for things I want. I agree with you 100%

Reply to this comment

avatar Bernard

Meh, I think people just need to calm down about the whole thing.
I kind of take offense to the whole thing being called a handout, but mainly because 2007 was the first year I had no tax liability because I was having trouble finding a job after being laid off by a major banking corporation(that happened to lose $10 Billion in the last quarter of 2007).
My tax year of 2008 will be MUCH different, but the amount we’ll be getting will help out with residual bills and everything.

Either way, this type of “Discussion”, or rather attacking, isn’t what this whole thing was meant for. It was meant to help out people trying to figure out if they’ll be eligible for the “Tax Rebate” and if so, how much they’ll get.
Please take the bickering to a different arena.

I understand the calculator-maker(cdg) getting a little upset that people come here and just immediately go to asking what they’ll get instead of reading, but then again you have to expect the questions and take them with a grain of salt. I’m not sure sarcastic responses are conducive to the point of this page.

Reply to this comment

avatar Dlphnnmom

Does anyone know how the credit effect those of us that only get to claim our dependent children every other year?
I get to claim my child in 2008 but the ex gets to claim him in 2007.
If they go by the 2007 for the number of dependents how will that work for me? Do I have to wait until 2008 tax to have it adjusted?
Humm I wonder if the goverment thought this one through?

Reply to this comment

avatar cdg

To #125 by Bernard:

1) I simply responded in kind to a very vicious attack (on those who pay taxes by someone who doesn’t) with a few facts that are conveniently ignored by such people, and by the politicians who foment and capitalize on class envy.

2) No one is calling “the whole thing a hand out”. For those who have been paying taxes, it is a well-deserved return of some of their hard earned money that has been confiscated from them in the form of “income taxes”. But for those who have not been paying taxes, it is quite definitely a hand-out.

3) If your company didn’t go belly up until the last quarter of 2007, why don’t you have income for at least 3/4 of the year, and thus qualify for a rebate? And if you were laid off earlier, where is the relevance of the company’s later financial troubles?

4) If your 2008 tax year “will be MUCH different”, you will receive your “rebate” then. As clearly explained above, the “rebate” is an additional (refundable) credit against 2008 taxes that is being payed approximately one year in advance. For this reason, it is initially based on your 2007 return. However, if your 2008 return qualifies you for a higher credit than your 2007 return, you will receive a payment for the difference. If your 2008 return qualifies you for a smaller credit than your 2007 return, you get to keep the difference.

So, if 2008 will be a better year for you, you will get your refund then. Say thank you to the Senate for their generosity with other people’s money.

5) I’m not sure what “this whole thing was meant for”. If you examine the various posts in this thread, people have expressed their various opinions pro and con throughout.

6) I spent a great deal of time tailoring and perfecting the calculator to be easy to use **and** produce the correct result (unlike all the other calculators that have appeared on the internet so far).

I spent even more time providing instructions and answering questions for those who are unable or unwilling to read and understand the tax bill, or even the previous explanations in this thread, and/or who have relied on inaccurate media explanations.

7) Defending those who pay taxes against vicious attacks by those who don’t is not “bickering”. It is essential.

8) I’ll tell you what Bernard. YOU spend your entire day answering questions that you’ve already answered, instead of getting your work done, and then you talk about grains of salt. OK?

9) I’m not sure there’s anything sarcastic about pointing out that instructions have already been provided, and asking what, if anything, was unclear (so that the instructions can be improved). Try to give others the benefit of the doubt, please.

To #126 by Dlphnnmom:

Your question raises a very interesting point. The “rebate” is technically a credit against your 2008 tax return. Your 2007 return will be used initially to compute the rebate, but the IRS will recompute it when you file your 2008 return. If you are “entitled” to a larger “rebate” you will get it in 2009. If not, you will not have to repay the excess.

Since your ex gets to claim the children for 2007, he will get a larger rebate because of the children (assuming they are qualified). But when the IRS recomputes *your* 2008 tax return, you will be entitled to a larger rebate (and receive a payment for the difference) because of the children, but your ex will NOT have to repay the difference even though his 2008 return shows he deserves less of a rebate.

That’s what the literal interpretation of the tax law seems to indicate. The IRS may take a different position, when and if they discover the problem.

I doubt the “government” thought this (or anything else) through. They just write up the legislation, and let the regulatory agencies and the courts sort out all the details and ambiguities.

Reply to this comment

avatar WVmilitarywife

I don’t think it’s fair to the folks that pay taxes and won’t be getting anything! I will further say that I am happy that I will be getting one but then again… I really wish the active duty military pay checks would go up so we wouldn’t qualify for it!

I wish the government wouldn’t be so “spend happy”! They are teaching the poor to go spend..go ahead… spend some more, don’t save, go to the welfare line after you bought your new HDTV and no food for your kids.. here is your bonus for getting your food stamps and not working to your potential!

Reply to this comment

avatar Dave

Greed, greed, greed. From the cooments here it is easy to see what is wrong with this country. Everyone is suffering from the “Imperial I syndrome”. What an “I” getting back? Why don’t “I” get a rebate? Why do “I” have to pay more than the other guy? “I” want mine no matter what it costs the country in the long run. You live in a country that 99% of the rest of the world would give anything to live in and by comparison you are some of the richest in the world so give it a rest people and thank God for what you have !!!

Reply to this comment

avatar Kam

I love what people think and how they express themselves in this matter.

The larger picture is — if our government didn’t waste so much money fighting for oil in Iraq we wouldn’t be in this fix. A trillion dollars expended and what did we gain? A trillion dollars could have bought our freedom from oil in the mideast.

I’m worried that our country is going to be another India with millions of homeless on the streets and a handful of rich with a small middle class. There appears to be an economic evolution of sorts.

The money needs to flow down to the least of our citizens. I say — the poor always have to spend. We should always support policies that give some wealth to the poor even if they don’t accomplish anything. It all trickles up anyway.

Reply to this comment

avatar cdg

To #130 by Kam:

What a load of liberal, socialist, alarmist nonsense.

If Benevolent Big Brother didn’t spend so much money trying to regulate our every move, and trying to protect us from every possible abuse — except violent crime, terrorism, and the government itself — THEN we wouldn’t be in this fix.

If the Democrats, beginning with the Carter Administration, and other card-carrying liberals, hadn’t seriously curtailed oil exploration and drilling operations in this country, THEN we wouldn’t be dependent on foreign oil.

If the State Department and every administration since World War I wasn’t so concerned with kissing Ahab’s backside to obtain oil, THEN we wouldn’t be paying so much for foreign and domestic oil, and wwe wouldn’t need to bow to Arab oil blackmail.

Furthermore, we are not “fighting over oil in Iraq”, but rather fighting for the freedom and democratization of a culture
that despises freedom and democratization, whilst trying to protect our vital interests (and those of our allies throughout the globe) against those who would destroy our way of life, and our very existence, if they were given free rein.

There is no tangible evidence that “a A trillion dollars could have bought our freedom from oil in the Mideast”. If pouring money into such a project would necessarily gain the desired result, believe me — BIG BUSINESS would have spent the trillion dollars, and profited from the results, long ago. We wouldn’t need the government to do so.

In fact, the only time we “need” the government to do anything is when there is no profit in it, and thus no logical reason to undertake something that will cost far more than any potential gain.

As you point out, the government has poured a vast amount of money into the war with Iraq, and the (supposed) war on terrorism (while at the same time supporting the very regimes that finance and foment terrorism, e.g. Saudi Arabia, the “Palestinian Authority”, and (yes!) Syria and Iraq), with nothing to show for it.

Similarly, our government has poured trillions into the “war on drugs”, only to wind up with more wide-spread drug usage than before the “war” began.

**In fact, no government ever solved any problem without creating a worse one!**

So what makes you think the government pouring a trillion dollars (or more) in alternate energy sources would accomplish anything? If there is a viable alternative, free enterprise and capitalism will discover it all on their own, and the research that will eventually accomplish this is going on right now.

For example, there is a company in Israel that has discovered how to burn sea water (sic!) and obtain energy from it (at least in the laboratory). If this can be done economically (and safely, of course), we can stop bowing to Arab oil blackmail, as sea water is the most abundant resource on the planet, and it is a renewable resource!

Don’t worry. This country is NOT going to be another India with millions of homeless on the streets and a handful of rich with a small middle class — unless the liberals get their way and turn us into another socialist state.

The money ALWAYS flows down to the poor. It NEVER trickles up, at least in a free society.

Reply to this comment

avatar Luke Landes ♦127,475 (Platinum)

Let’s keep this civil and on topic. There are other avenues for arguing betweeb liberal and conservative ideologies. Let’s stick to the tax rebate rather than ideological debate.

Reply to this comment

avatar samantha

the calculator says my husband and i are eligible for the full rebate amount….but my income tax lady says we are not because i did not have any income for 2007???

Reply to this comment

avatar samm the man

wow , never thought id see so many people complain about getting more money back… weird. You dont need this calculator to figure what your getting back, its easy. If you paid NO taxes, your getting nothing back, if you make more than 150k you get a little less back. if you made more than 3k you will get 600 per person, 1200 per couple 300 per kid. come guys its not rocket . science!! they say its not “free money” but in a way it is. this is from a tax cut, it is YOUR money , correct, but its money you normally paid in taxes, now your getting it back, hence the word “Rebate” now quit cryin and buy AMERICAN!!! USA USA!!!

Reply to this comment

avatar Toby

To Samantha

If your husband’s income and tax liability is enough for the full rebate, it doesn’t matter if you didn’t have any income. A joint return treats both of you equally no matter which one of you earned the income.

Reply to this comment

avatar Toby

I’m suggesting an additional line of javascipt code for the calculator for a situation that probably won’t be common, but could happen. If you file married filing separately and are forced to itemize because your spouse itemizes, you could end up itemizing for less than the standard deduction. So if your only income is $8,000 unemployment, and you itemize for $2,000, you would end up with taxable income of $2,600 and a tax liability of $260. This scenario shows a rebate of $260 in the calculator. In reality, you would fail to meet the requirement of qualifying income of at least $3,000 or net income tax liability which is greater than zero, and gross income which is greater than the sum of the basic standard deduction plus the exemption amount. That would mean that the rebate would be zero. If you add the following line of code after the if statement in the section of the program that applies the special rules, the calculator will show a rebate of 0 in this scenario.
else
{rebateamount=0;}

Is this correct, or do the earned income and gross income requirements only apply for getting the $300? In other words, can your gross income be below the standard deduction plus exemption and you still get a rebate for whatever tax liability you had, but not get bumped up to $300? If this is the case then the calculator is correct as is.

Reply to this comment

avatar Sherrie

wILL i QULIFY FOR THE tAX rEBATE IF I CLAMMED ERNED INCOME CREIT WHEN I FILED MY TAXES

Reply to this comment

avatar Toby

People asking if they qualify for the rebate should really believe the calculator. The IRS gives 28 different scenarios on their website and the calculator gives the correct answer for each one. If you want to ask anyway, please leave more details like AGI, tax liability,earned income, social security, etc.

To Sherrie
There is not enough information in your post to answer your question. You can get an earned income credit on earned income of less than $3,000, and in that case you won’t get the rebate. If your earned income is $3,000 or more, you will get a rebate. The earned income credit isn’t part of the criteria for qualifying for a rebate, so it won’t help you get a rebate and it won’t stop you from getting a rebate.

Reply to this comment

avatar Shannon

What is net tax liability?

Reply to this comment

avatar Critic

In my opinion, they are just giving a rebate to try to postpone the recession until Bush is out of office.

Reply to this comment

avatar Jim

I have a good question that the specialist in the IRS could not answer. On their example line 4 for a single person without children, if they have an AGI of $10,000 that does not come from any of the incomes that they say you need to qualify, ” wage income, social security benifits, veterans benefits, etc.”; than on form 1040, what line is this income coming from to have a $10,000 AGI to let you qualify to get the rebate which they say is $300? It looks to me like something is missing.

Reply to this comment

avatar Toby

To Jim:
Here is a link to the 1040. http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f1040.pdf?portlet=3 Here are some of the lines that this income could be coming from: 8a,9a,10,11,13,14,15b,17,19,21. These are all lines where you could have income that isn’t considered qualifying income. If you don’t have qualifying income of at least $3,000, then you have to take the second part of the rule into consideration.

Even without $3,000 in qualifying income, if the “taxpayer” has gross income greater than the basic standard deduction plus one exemption (two exemptions for married couples filing jointly) AND the “taxpayer” has net taxable income of at least $1

then the “taxpayer” qualifies for the minimum “rebate” amount of $300 ($600 for married couples filing jointly) plus an additional $300 per child.

If a single person had $10,000 in unemployment and a tax liability of $125, they would meet the requirement of AGI being greater than the standard deduction($5,350) plus one exemption($3,400). They would also meet the requirement of tax liability of at least $1 and thus, would get a $300 rebate.

It amazes me that an IRS “specialist” can’t answer this.

Reply to this comment

avatar Jim

To Toby
I didn’t know they had a second part. They aren’t very clear on their web site about how everything adds up. I know about the income from the lines you mentioned, but in one sentance they say one thing and the next they say something else. They say that interest income doesn,t count, but you say if it is large enough that after the standard and personal deduction, if you oue taxes on it, than it does. (Example) Do the math on $18,000 dollars in interest. That would be a tax liability of $1,000. For a single person this would be a rebate of $600. if this is ture.

Reply to this comment

avatar Toby

Interest income doesn’t count towards the $3,000 in qualifying income to get a $300 minimum rebate without any tax liability. So $4,000 interest income with 0 tax liability would get you no rebate. $4,000 qualifying income with no tax liability would get you a $300 rebate. Since your interest income of $18,0000 is high enough to generate a tax liability of $1,000 you will get a refund of the tax liability up to $600 for single. If your interest income was $8,850 with a tax liability of $10, you would get a rebate of $300 because your AGI would be greater than the standard deduction plus exemption and you tax liability would be at least $1.

Reply to this comment

avatar Leah

I am kinda disgusted with this whole idea in general. People making $14,000 a year, have a couple of children and get a tax ‘refund’ of almost $7,000, didn’t pay IN any taxes (Zeroed out on line 57) and the tax rebate calculator says they get $1,200?? They have already ‘taken’ $7,000 of money that they didn’t earn! How in the heck do they get more and the people who paid in get less?? This is the stupidest thing I have ever seen!

Reply to this comment

avatar Gena

I’m a widow filing as head of household with one child. My part-time wages totaled $2917.00, but my 6 yr old daughter received Social Security Survivors Benefits of about $8000.00. Our only other income was interest income of $11,000.00 Will we qualify for a rebate? I’m confused about whether the Soc Sec counts toward the $3000 minimum earned income because our Soc Sec doesnt come from Dept of Veterans Affairs.

Reply to this comment

avatar Blkcam

tax rebates may be a short term stimulus but in the long run,if Americans bought 50% less foreign made goods then the economy would come back on its own!!!

Reply to this comment

avatar joey

Yhis is my situation Married Filing Joint 2 dependents both OVER 17, one is in college 4 exemptions in all Do we get anything? Thanks

Reply to this comment

avatar Rick

Seems to me, the best economic stimulus would be to no longer grant any bennies to illegals and terminate their employment, let Americans move into those jobs ( including my son and two of his friends who were displaced because they wouldn’t work for one half of our $7.50 minimum wage ) have them pay their taxes as well as getting an income to spend and their medical and dental restored through the private sector there by restoring a few jobs in the medical field and not adding more government jobs. Make it attractive for corperations to bring their jobs back to the U.S.A. and costly to import goods. THERE’S YOUR STIMULUS PACKAGE !!!

Reply to this comment

avatar Jim

This rebate program has a lot of loopholes in it if the situation falls right for you. Example; If you file single and have a qualifying dependent and have a non qualifying minimum income, but an AGI of $14,000, you get a $600 rebate, but if the same as above applies to you and you file as head of household , you get nothing.
I can think of some other things that would also benefit some people with no income and taking an IRA distribution. If they are over 55 and want to withdraw some of their money without paying taxes on some of the amount above their deductables.
That is, if all of this is correct.

Reply to this comment

avatar evelyn carter

my mother is 82 years old and is only drawing social security. Can she file taxes in order to get the stimilus rebate?

Also my sister is on social security and a state supplemental check. Can she file to receive a rebate?

Thank you for the help

Reply to this comment

avatar Gena

Toby-
Can you respond to #146 about Soc Sec survivors benefits?
Thanks- Gena

Reply to this comment

avatar Gena

Flexo- can you respond to #146 about Soc Sec Survivors benefits for me?
Thanks- Gena

Reply to this comment

avatar Luke Landes ♦127,475 (Platinum)

Gena: On every location where the IRS mentions survivors’ benefits, they are very specific in saying that benefits *received from the Department of Veterans Affairs* are the benefits that will be included in the qualifying income calculator. Did you receive these benefits from a private insurer? My guess is that they would not be included… but you should always check with an *informed* tax professional — which I am not.

Reply to this comment

avatar Toby

To 146
I’m not sure if they are including Social Security Survivors Benefits since the IRS site says survivors’ benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs. However, without seeing your return, your earned income of $$2,917 plus your interest income of $11,000 should give you an AGI of $13,917. If that leaves you with a tax liability of at least $1, you should get a $600 rebate. Let me know what form you used, what your AGI was and what your net tax liability was. If you don’t know your net tax liability, I can tell you what numbers to look at based on what 1040 you used.

Reply to this comment

avatar tiffany

Is self-employment tax figured into the calculation at all? (married filing jointly, no kids, over $300 qualifying income)

Looks like I have a $0 taxable income, but also $1200 in self-employment tax (line 58). I will only get the minimum rebate rather than a larger one based on the self-employment taxes paid, correct? If those self-employment taxes were seen as standard tax (line 44) then we would get the full $1200. Seems like an oversight to me.

Reply to this comment

avatar Toby

The self-employment tax is your contribution to Social Security and Medicare. It has no bearing on the rebate. It works the same with a regular job, the Social Security and Medicare you pay doesn’t factor into the rebate. You need $3,000 qualifying income, not $300. If you have the $3,000 you will get the minimum rebate.

Reply to this comment

avatar firefly814

Making six figures and can still find something to complain about. If cost of living is so high in your area then it is quite simple,,, MOVE…. Do Any of you think that we choose to be single mothers with little to no income? I never dreamed that my husband would cheat on me and run off leaving me (a stay at home mom for the last 14 years) to care for my children, but he did and i am doing the best i can.. I thank God for any money that comes my way right now, but i do not think it is owed to me. I am trying to support my family the best i can, but it is a struggle every minute.

Reply to this comment

avatar firefly814

I havent seen anyone mention the filing status of Head of Household. The rebate for this status is supposed to be $600.00. When i use the calculater it gives me a rebate amount of only $900.00 because i used my only option of single but when figuring it using the Head of Household amount i should get back $1200.00, if my information is correct. I have been reading info all night, and on all the other sights it is giving the $600.00 figure for that status. Please let me know?

Thank You!!

Reply to this comment

avatar yank5353

What I don’t understand is, my daughter is 17 years old and in 12th grade, but I can’t take a credit for her anylonger. I thought the legal age was 18? I still have to fully support her. She has a part time job that she made 4,000 last year, but because I claim her as a dependent she won’t get rebate and I won’t get the rebate for her because she’s 17. This does’nt make sense to me.

Reply to this comment

avatar Jim

I see some problems with this calculator with giving an accurate answer with what the real results would be on a tax form. If a single person with a child made a non-qualifying income of $8751 but an AGI above $8750 and claimed themselves and the child as dependents, this would be $6800. The standard deduction would be $5350. That’s a total $12150.
With an AGI of $8751 and a deduction of $12150, there would never be a tax liability. So with no tax liability, there wouldn’t be any rebate. This would appear in all the filing status, so in order to have a tax liability your AGI would need to be higher than your deductions to qualify under the AGI. Filing as head of household would make the deductions even higher
Hope this didn’t confuse anyone.

Reply to this comment

avatar yank5353

I think as long as your child is in school and you are suppoting them through college, you should be able to take a tax credit for them. If not completley at least a partial credit. I still have to cloth, feed and house them.

Reply to this comment

avatar Luke Landes ♦127,475 (Platinum)

Jim: The calculator is accurate based on the bill that was signed into law. Certain inputs are calculated differently than they would be for other purposes, so please check the explanations by scrolling down in the calculator window. If you are still unsure, let me know. Based on your description, I entered Single, 1, 0, 0, 0, 8751, and 0 into the form and the result is 0.

Reply to this comment

avatar Jim

Anyway you look at it, if you have a non-qualifying income you will need to have an AGI larger than your deductions to have a taxable income that will generate a tax liability of at lease $1. Examples; single with one child, ($12155); single with one child filing head of household ($14655); married without children, ($17505); Married with one child, ($20905)
Some people may be better off not claiming their child. Example; single with AGI of $8755 has a tax liability of $1, gets a rebate of $300.A single claiming one child and an AGI of $8755 will get nothing unless their AGI is at least $12155, then they would get $600.
If you are single claiming one child, the calculator does allow you to enter an AGI of less than $12155 and enter a tax liability of $1. Doing so shows a rebate instead of an error. Like you say, if they enter it right than it does work.

Reply to this comment

avatar Ben Grim

Im on SSI (social security income ) .I dont pay taxes on it.I could use the money.Im not able to work because of a mass in my brain.I will not get any of this money.Ive paid my share of taxes through the years.The people who need and could use it the most,will be left out.Those who have a comfortable life (Bill Gates,ball players,rock stars,and yes gang bangers ) will be getting some money.Life’s not fair this isnt either.

Reply to this comment

avatar Kim

Info about if you owe taxes from past year. I took this right from the IRS.GOV website.

Q. I’m eligible for a payment but I still owe federal income tax from a prior year. Will my payment be reduced?

A. Yes. For this purpose, the stimulus payment is treated like any other tax refund. This means that part or all of your payment can be used to pay past-due federal or state income taxes or non-tax federal debt such as student loans and child support. If this occurs, you will receive a letter explaining how the stimulus payment was applied.

Reply to this comment

avatar firefly814

Child Support is never taken from federal taxes, only from State taxes. But, yes they will take the rebate if you owe back federal taxes. But they definetly will not touch the rebate for child support.. Just went through this..

Reply to this comment

avatar Maurice

What if a person passed in July of 2007 and normally would not be required to file taxes, as the only income was $9523 in Social Security. Should the Estate file for the $300, or as I read is this only for next years taxes based on 2007 income and not eligible?

Reply to this comment

avatar Tacks Preparer

The Federal Government does hold refunds for child support.

Reply to this comment

avatar Bruce

Untill the IRS gets their own calculator up yours does great job. I have two links to this on my site.
Thanks

Reply to this comment

avatar Amber

Maurice,

you should definitely file the tax return for the deceased taxpayer. Though it would only qualify for a $300.00 rebate.

Reply to this comment

avatar sexycountrychika1

i was told that i would only recieve this if i was over the age of 25 is that true?

Reply to this comment

avatar Amber

As long as you made at least 3,000 dollars and no one has claimed you on there tax return, then you qualify….as long as you file a return. If you were claimed for the year then do not worry about it. There is always next year.

Reply to this comment

avatar Amber

ben, file a return as long as you have more than 3,000 in ssi benefits you still qualify for at least 300.00

Reply to this comment

avatar Ben J. Grim

Amber i belive this is me.I get SSI i cant get the rebate since i dont pay tax on the money i get.Found this in IRS bulletin. Certain Benefits Count toward Qualifying Income
Social Security benefits reported on the 2007 Form 1099-SSA, which people would have received in January 2008. People who do not have a Form 1099 may estimate their annual Social Security benefit by taking their monthly benefit, multiplying it by the number of months during the year they received the benefits, and entering the number on Line 20a of Form 1040 or Line 14a of the Form 1040A. Supplemental Security Income (SSI) does not count as qualifying income for the stimulus payment

Reply to this comment

avatar Ben J. Grim

Supplemental security income (SSI) payments are not considered Social Security benefits and thus cannot be included. Because SSI is not taxable, it is not reported to you on Form SSA-1099. [New 2/27/2008]

Reply to this comment

avatar Coastie124

It appears that this is more of a foward on next years taxes than a handout as many have called it. I’m I missing something? It says that it will apply to next years rebate and that if it is more than what your rebate would be then you wouldn’t owe any of it back. But if you owe more than the rebate then you have to pay the difference. That was just reading the fine print on this page. Not official.

Reply to this comment

avatar Luke Landes ♦127,475 (Platinum)

Coastie: It’s a forward on next year’s *new tax credit,* not next year’s taxes. There’s a slight difference, but it’s important. The law creates a *new credit* for 2008′s taxes only and allows tax filers to receive it this summer. This credit is separate from the refund due to overpayment or bill due to underpayment of your tax liability, and it will affect neither.

Reply to this comment

avatar Amber

Any rebate that is recieve that exceeds the amount anyone is eligible for on there 2008 return will NOT have to be repaid.

The tax rebates are NOT TAXABLE.

The IRS Will not be contacting anyone by phone or e-mail….so don’t give out information

And Please remember to keep the letter stateing how much of a tax rebate you receive this year and take it to your local tax associate next year. They WILL NOT already have this information and it is needed to determine if you are eligible for more of the credit next year. as this is an advance on a new credit they are implementing on the 2008 taxes.

Reply to this comment

avatar theoneandonly

Geez firefly814, you’ve just got all the answers don’t you? I’ll bet the original poster never ever realized they could just MOVE! Did you miss the part where the person said it costs 2x as much to live in Manhattan as anywhere else? So let me explain this slowly…if they make $100,000 in Manhattan and your cost of living is $110,000…is it really worth moving to somewhere cheaper, where you’ll get paid $50,000 and your cost of living is $55,000? I guess you’d be up $5K plus the $300 rebate, and spend $6K relocating…As to your situation…well, if it’s so hard being a single mother…just GET MARRIED! If you don’t like having little to no income…GET A BETTER JOB! So simple, isn’t it? Glad I could help. Nothing quite as fun as being a judgmental a** on Internet bulletin boards, I always say.

Reply to this comment

avatar walkerny

when they give a ‘rebate’ to someone who does not pay any federal tax other than FICA, lets call it what it is : WELFARE.

Reply to this comment

avatar anna

Honestly, I myself can more than take care of my family and probably the family next door as well. No one hears me complaining about the fact that I won’t get this rebate.

This “rebate” would not be happening at all if the economy wasn’t in such a rut. Perhaps some of us that are more fortunate should spend more money. Then, we wouldn’t have to worry about the “poor” getting free money.

And since when did those of us with 6 figure incomes become better than the single mom that’s waiting table trying her best to provide for her family. Isn’t that what any parent is doing? Trying to give their family everything they can?

And when did everyone forget that $$$ does not equal happiness or love?

Reply to this comment

avatar cookie

tax rebate ? Bull****. If 1200 will stimulate the economy, why not give out 12,000 wouldn’t that do 10 times the good. Ridiculous idea all around. And my wife and I will not be getting any of this so called rebate. So sick of working my tail off so that my tax money can go to disincent people to work harder or smarter for themselves.

Reply to this comment

avatar cookie

Amen to that!

Reply to this comment

avatar cookie

Comment # 181 , I agree wholeheartedly.

Reply to this comment

avatar walkerny

Anna, we don’t mind a single mom that works hard, nor does wanting to keep the money we earned make us out to feeling superior to anyone. We DO mind the rampant redistribution of wealth going on in this country.

As long as my money is being handed to others, how about I get to intrude into the way many on the dole live THEIR life. Specifically, how about before you receive any redistribution of wealth, you take a drug test. How about if you have a child out of wedlock, you have to take birth control in order to receive public funds.

Loss of freedom? Yes, but so is the government taking from those who have done nothing but work hard and in too many cases, giving to those whose only effort has been to TAKE TAKE TAKE, be lazy, abuse drugs, or spread their legs and squirt out wards of the state??

Author: anna
“And since when did those of us with 6 figure incomes become better than the single mom that’s waiting table trying her best to provide for her family…”

Reply to this comment

avatar walkerny

By the way, if you think I was stereotyping, I was in a convenience store standing next to a mother with a baby in her arms, another young child at her side, obviously pregnant again, looked no older than 18, and she is bitching to her counterpart “It’s not fair! Married couples will get their (stimulus) check first!

BTW Anna, I’ll spend my money or NOT as I see fit. You telling me I should spend more is yet another intrusion into my freedom.

Reply to this comment

avatar AsuPA

How fair is that to collect taxes from non-resident aliens but treat them as dirt when it comes to paying them back? Democracy at its best?

Reply to this comment

avatar Bernard

“By the way, if you think I was stereotyping, I was in a convenience store standing next to a mother with a baby in her arms, another young child at her side, obviously pregnant again, looked no older than 18, and she is bitching to her counterpart “It’s not fair! Married couples will get their (stimulus) check first!”

No…not stereotyping at all. You know, forming your opinion based on a select few individuals in the group you choose.

I think it’s been pointed out once in this discussion, but what makes me sad is the constant “Me, Me, Me…” going on. So what you mean to tell me is that you wouldn’t like to help out in near-depression conditions? That’s extremely selfish, sir or ma’am.

I work every day(Yes, 7 days a week) to provide for my family. We had a hard time last year due to big layoffs at the company I was working for.
If you’re going to put those types of stipulations onto people who didn’t have to pay taxes, such as my family, to get their “Stimulus Payment”, why not put the same stipulations on the wealthy in order to keep their money?

There are people that take advantage in every race, class, etc. Whether it’s taking advantage of the system to be lazy, or taking advantage of those below you to gain more for yourself.

I agree that too many young people are having children way too fast without realizing the responsibilities, personal and financial, first. However, maybe the education system has something to do with that(Abstinence vs. Protection) however that’s another issue.

I just wanted to reply to this, but in all honesty I wish this discussion had been kept to questions regarding the actual Stimulus Payment and not personal opinions based on class as had been requested by the mods. I say delete all the posts, if able, and start over.

Reply to this comment

avatar cookie

What is the epitomy of greed. Wanting to keep more of the money that you worked hard for, or wanting more of someone elses money ? I think it is the latter. That is all this “rebate” is, by capping the level of income that is eligible to recieve it and offering it to people who payed no taxes they are just taking money from one class of people and giving it to another. If it were to be at all fair it would simply pay out a set percentage of ones income, available to all earners. And even at that I would posit that it is a lot more eficient for the government to not take the money in the first place, rather than to take it and then have to spend a portion of it trying to figure out a way to give it to someone else. How wastefull is that? Paying additional money to Uncle Sam so they can waste some of it while trying to decide how we should have spent it and then giving a small portion of it back in services that some want and others dont is just a plain bad and wastefull way to do business. ( power to the people )

Reply to this comment

avatar Bernard

I’ll agree with you, again, on low income people that sit around and take advantage of the system. However, I’ll also say that the wealthy side of “the epitome” of greed are those that have all the wealth and keep it only to themselves.
Maybe I’m different than a lot of people, but if I were so well off, I would help people that needed it as much as possible.

And if you really, REALLY want to get into why we’re in this situation in the first place and talk about irresponsible spending…
…Maybe it stems from the fact that our current administration has run our country, as a business, into the ground. We have burned bridges with most of our allies as well as going into a war to occupy a nation without a well thought-out plan, based on lies. Spending a projected total of $3+ trillion on this war is not a responsible way to spend our country’s money. Especially not when the current administration took office and inherited the highest national surplus our country has seen.

You also have to take into account the tax breaks that big business has gotten while still taking jobs overseas, as well as the lack of punishment for those top few that get away with murder.
Chuck Prince, for example, under whom Citigroup lost $10 billion in less than one year and was still paid more than 100x the average household income.
Take into account in the $10 billion loss the lay-offs that occur, and maybe you can understand why there are a LOT of people in a situation where this stimulus package can help them out quite a bit.

I have no problem with people wanting to live out their ‘American Dream’ and be well-off to give their families everything they want. What I have a problem with is the old phrase “The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.”
You have extremely wealthy people who are able to help out and choose not to. Why do they choose this? Greed.

**I’m not debating the War in Iraq, and tried to keep it to the monetary side of the argument. So don’t start that here. Again, why not bring this back to what the forum was meant for?

Reply to this comment

avatar frannie

I thought everyone was suppose to be eligable. not so! I have a son that is disabled and that lives with us. he gets his social security and his ssi. he has been disabled since he was 2. when we file our taxes, we file him as a dependent. we dot not get a credit for him just as a dependent. now we were told today that he can’t get the tax rebate. and we won’t get one for him either. other people on s.s is getting it.It’s not right. people that live on only $623.00 a month realley need it.

Reply to this comment

avatar T. Daniel Scaringi

My wife and I have been married for 20 years and we have two children, both still in high school. Our youngest is 15. He will qualify for the $300 rebate. Our oldest is 17, still in school, eats more/costs more, ect. He does not qualify for the rebate. What’s up with that. If he is still a minor isnt’ he a child? The legal wording should read “under 18″ and not “under 17″.

Reply to this comment

avatar Linda

i was told that the time you get your stimulus payment is based on the last four digits of your social security number. Can someone please tell me where this can be found out on the internet? I would love to know when to expect my stimulus money. Thankyou All.

Reply to this comment

avatar MS

My son,is my qualifying dependent age 18, full time student. Why is the cutoff age 17? Will he get the rebate later when filing taxes on his own in 2009? I saw several comments but no real explaination.

Reply to this comment

avatar Luke Landes ♦127,475 (Platinum)

MS: He will get the rebate on his own next year if he qualifies, but you can not claim him as a dependent (for the purposes of this rebate) this year. As far as *why* the cut-off age is 17 rather than 18 or why they didn’t make things much simpler by linking the two definitions of a qualifying dependent together, I really can’t say.

Reply to this comment

avatar Lyle Vannier

Just to verify…..a MFJ return with one dependent and a 175,000 AGI will have a 2007 rebate check reduced by 5% of the excess of AGI over 150,000 x .05 (1,250), and thus will receive only 250 in 2007.

BUT, if the 2008 MFJ return has an AGI of 150,000, the rebate will be recalculated and an additional credit of 1,250 will be applied toward the 2008 FIT due.

True??

Reply to this comment

avatar anna

MS: If you claim your son as a dependent on your own tax return, then he will not get a rebate this summer. However, if you do not claim him as a dependent on your tax return next year and he files a return, then he should be able to recieve the Credit on his tax return next year. I hope this answers your question. The reason for the age 17 limit is because in the year a dependent turns 17 they are no longer a QUALIFYING CHILD for the child tax credit.

Reply to this comment

avatar Pua

In regaurds to the 2008 tax rebate. My husband and I filed joint with injured spouse form and we have 2 children together. He owes back child support from a previous marriage. I understand that his portion will more likely be offset, but will they take the $300 rebate for each child owed to us for our children to payback his back support?

Reply to this comment

avatar MJ

I don’t see where the ‘calculator’ above takes into account self employment tax paid. I may not have had taxable income, but I paid ‘taxes’ via Schedule SE – self employment tax. This should ? mean that I get the base tax of $600, but it looks like I only qualified for the two $300 taxes for my children…

Am I correct?

Reply to this comment

Leave a Comment

Connect with Facebook

Note: Use your name or a unique handle, not the name of a website or business. No deep links or business URLs are allowed. Spam, including promotional linking to a company website, will be deleted. By submitting your comment you are agreeing to these terms and conditions.

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.

Previous post:

Next post: