Disenfranchising the underprivileged!

I am a social worker and I have seen a lot of confusion and problems with the free tax programs for low-income filers and the tax rebate.

- If you have zero income but receive social security, you cannot file electronically. The IRS will bounce the return.

- Some of the free programs won't even print out a return if you only have social security benefits and no other income. The program thinks it's helping you, because it thinks you don't have to file. Wrong if you want a rebate.

- You must use a 1040 to declare social security income only, but again, the computer programs fill out 1040EZ forms as normally you don't have to tell the IRS if you only have social security income.

- Hopefully these problems have been fixed, but if not, most cities and states have free tax assistance from professional preparers for people with low income. Ask at your local library. It's very easy to fill out a 1040 if you only have social security income.

The IRS should have created a one page form for individuals with social security income only to fill out and sign to get rebates...

@snowpuff:
Yes, they should have.
In fact, I hear they're working on it now. The final draft should be available on the IRS website sometime in 2092.

I can file electronically?

yea, free money for the people who already live here for free. w00h00000.

people who pay less then 600$ in taxes a year should get 0.

I would be ok with people who pay like 200 in taxes getting 200 back, but come on, giving people 600 for nothing?

Here is a unique option; print the form and fill it out by hand; toss a stamp on the envelope and drop it in the mailbox. Not being able to file electronically for whatever reason should not be to much of an inconvenience

@Bladefist: This isn't a tax refund. It's a stimulus program.

@Bladefist: The stated goal of the money is "economic stimulus". There is no reason logically why that should be coupled to income. In fact, it might stimulate the economy the MOST when given to the people with the lowest income. It's not supposed to be just a tax cut.

Here's an interesting question.. what about someone that filed a full on 1040 but got claimed by someone else. Will they also get a "stimulus" check?

@allstarecho: Nope. Whoever claims you as a dependent gets $300, though.

This is no different than the IRS asking to see your receipt at the door.

@snowpuff: @johnva:

I understand that. Regardless what you call it, it is what it is. The government is giving people money. Some of which have not given the government any money. Maybe the economy would be better if government just lowered taxes.

Allstarecho - I had the same thing as a college student during the last stimulus/recession cycle. Mom got the 300 or whatever.

@gamehendge2000:

Big Fat groan ... lol

@Bladefist: here here!

From a fellow Evil Conservative

@Bladefist:

"I understand that."

I don't think you do. It has nothing to do with whether or not you gave money to the government. Some rich people will pay no taxes in 2007. Some poor people won't either. Some people are mean. Some people are kind. Some people give up seats for the elderly on the bus. Some people smoke crack. Some people think folks who are disabled or elderly and are on social security are having a big ol' party, yelling "wahooo I get $12,000 a year to live on!"

Most of these people and many more will get a stimulus check. The retailers and corporations will not care who it is spending the money on their products and services. Nor will the economy.

@Bladefist: This stimulus package isn't really going to help the economy in the way it's made out to. It's just Bush's last ditch resort to try to look nice before leaving office. Lower taxes wouldn't make it through Congress now...look at the deficits we've had. Democrats are only going for this because they want some of the credit for this.

@Bladefist:
It a combination of both concepts. The Republican ideal of lowering taxes, by rebating some income taxes. And the Democratic concept of wealth redistribution by giving rebates to some folks that may not pay income taxes. Regardless, it's beneficial to the economy and therefore everyone.

@Copper:
Right, Bush waited over 7 years to consider lowering taxes. Oh-kay.

And the rebates represent lowering taxes at least temporarily. Deficit, shmeficit. Plently of big money is wasted elsewhere. The Iraqi's should be pumping oil into our tankers for the next ten years.

And maybe the Democrats really want to help the economy, isn't that possible?

@Bladefist: @AD8BC: Why is the answer to always lower taxes? At what point do you stop? When the government has zero income to run on?

I agree that too high taxes can be bad, but too low taxes can have negative consequences also (e.g. overheating economy--inflation/no services).

But I digress.

We'd be better off if the government didn't spend money it didn't have. If you want to go to war, then raise taxes or ask people to conserve existing resources that can be diverted to the war effort. And no, a car magnet isn't supporting the troops.

But I digress again...

i'm in yur taxes

attractin' yur auditz

I hate it when the wrong words are used. It is only a rebate to those of us who put in something from which to return. It is charity to all else. I'm sure Circuit City will be happy to honor that $100 rebate on that TV I never bought from them. Personally, I like giving to charites...I just like the who and how much forced on me.

@taka2k7: Read the constitution. The national government is only supposed to have limited control and have limited responsibilities. It has grown out of control.

And while I do like Bush, he has not been a true conservative in his spending. But I also understand its not that simple. You have to pass things through Senate and the House and it takes time.

Yes we spend too much. I've never heard anyone argue with that. But we tax too much. Something has to give. Whether we spend less then lower taxes, or tax less which prompts less spending, I don't care. Needs to be done.

@AD8BC: It's hard to be a conservative and involved in discussions on the internet, let the force be with you. Intelligence will prevail!

Either people will be all..

Saving:
Im in ur ackounts
Countin ur moneys

or

Spending:
Im in ur wishlis
Countin ur toyz

Whatever anyone's personal opinions on Bush, this is a solid plan that hopefully, will stimulate the economy. There are plenty of people who are not living paycheck to paycheck, who are managing bills. And there are plenty of people who will use the extra money given to them to buy some toys.

@Bladefist anyway...

@Bladefist: There is absolutely ZERO evidence in recent history that lowered taxes prompts lowered spending. Especially when Republicans are in charge. Republicans represent fiscal irresponsibility, first and foremost.

@apotheosis: Get a clue. The bottom 30% of American wage earners pay a net zero in income taxes? Why should they receive a refund or advancement??? Btw the top 10% of wage earners pay 50% of all income taxes collected... next time you are dinner with 4 other people try this. Point at two people and say "you don't have to pay." Then point at the two other people and say "You each pay 25%." And then you can pay the remaining 50%. Or, in true Democrat style, point at the person who makes the most money and say "You pay for the meal for all of us. You don't need the money anyway."

@MyCokesBiggerThanYours: The bottom 30% of wage earners DO pay taxes, though. They pay a much greater percentage of their income in payroll taxes than the top earners do. What do you think of that? Social Security tax is a regressive tax, due to the income cap.

You "conservatives" sure are fond of simplistic analogies that distort the reality of the situation.

@MyCokesBiggerThanYours: Get another clue.....

Everyone pays taxes, even the least among us. That FICA is a tax, a flat tax (15.3 percent) that gets spent as rapidly as it goes into the treasury and replaced with IOUs. It's a bite too, as being self employed, I have to pay the employer "contribution" as well. Same goes for Medicaid as well.

@taka2k7: Its worse then you think. Its whatever money the government takes out of the economy either by taxing or borrowing. Every time they cut taxes, they have to borrow ever more money.

@johnva: a simple google search of "tax bracket" shows your typical liberal economic ignorance.

Isn't the stimulus check for people who filed a 2006 Federal return?if so I'm guessing an to be eligible.one who didn't would have to file an amended return.

@Bladefist: Seriously, you are really making yourself look foolish. Do you even know what "payroll tax" means? "Tax brackets" are not applicable to FICA tax. They only apply to income tax, which I was NOT talking about.

@topgun: No. They will determine it from your 2007 tax return.

@snowpuff:
You're wrong.
It is an advance on your next tax refund.

If you don't pay income taxes you shouldn't get a check.
The poor don't pay their fare share. FICA & Medicare don't count.

@MyCokesBiggerThanYours: Are we really doing the progressive income tax debate again? It makes sense to have high taxes at the upper end because rich people consume massive amounts of public resources to protect their vast assets.

It makes sense to have little tax at the low end because anything more would throw low-wage earners into abject poverty, creating an even more severely disequal distribution of wealth than we already have, destroying social cohesion. (And in the end, capital owners might just have to make up the slack anyways -- many would elect to do nothing rather than work for abject poverty, leaving those low-wage jobs unfilled.)

@modenastradale: Oops. Hit "send" too early.

I was going to say: the problem is not the concept of progressive taxation. The real problem is that the boundary lines have been drawn in such a way that the middle class is being squeezed out of existence. People who earn 75k in expensive areas (servicing large student debt and/or providing for families) are being slapped with policies originally intended for the rich -- even though they're just a paycheck away from bankruptcy.

@WV.Hillbilly: First off, there are tax credits that function as essentially a "negative income tax" already, like the EITC. You can get these credits refunded even if you don't make enough money to owe taxes. The tax credit this "rebate" is against functions in a similar way for those people.

Also, why on earth do FICA and Medicare taxes not "count" as taxes? They are taxes just like any other. The poor pay a disproportionate share of them.

@WV.Hillbilly: According to the IRS website, the stimulus checks are non-taxable income and won't count against your 2008 tax rebate or increase the amount you owe.

Doesn't sound like an advance to me.

The entire bill for the stimulus package will amount to less than a month of paying for the war. It probably amounts to less than a years contracts to KBR, Mr. Cheney's good buddies. And by the way, many of those folks living off social security these days are members of the "greatest generation" that republicans like to pretend they care so much about. Course many of them are veterans, which we know conservatives have no use for. Once a vet hangs up his guns and ammo, the republicans consider them dead weight. Walk a mile, dude, before you start deciding what others need or don't need.

Douche bags.

The mortgage companies appreciate Bush helping you make a payment on your house. Thanks.

@johnva: Learn to read - I said income tax. Look it up at irs.gov. The poorest of the poor get more money in the annual refund than they paid if they have children. KNOW YOUR FACTS. The rest of their money goes to social services - which they seem to want so they shouldn't be complaining. And if you want to bring up up social security - blame unionized government employees. THey don't pay into social security so they aren't paying into the program the poor need and want.

@Rusted: Learn to read. I said income tax look it up at irs.gov

@modenastradale: Hey - did I say progressive taxation was unfair or wrong. NO. I said the poor don't deserve an income tax refund or advance because they don't pay income taxes. Thats it.

But you also have to into account the poor arent paying luxury taxes, real estate taxes, (which pays for schools) and a multitude of other taxes associated with ownership and wealth.

And I am sorry you hate the wealthy because its the wealthy that provide jobs, infrastructure like roads, electricity, and water; investment capital... etc. Not to mention the wealthy assume all the economic risk. Bigger risk equals bigger rewards.

@Bladefist: It's a proven fact that people of the lower class think money is meant to be spent, middle class people think money is to be saved, and upper class people believe money is to be invested. Now if this STIMULUS PLAN is to work the way it's supposed to, why the hell wouldn't they give it to the people who will spend it?

@MyCokesBiggerThanYours: johnva's right, who pays more dollars doesn't matter, the lower classes pay a much higher PERCENTAGE of their yearly income. So what if the upper class is paying 50% of the taxes? the top 1% pulls in 57% of the national income, the top 10% make more money per year than the 37 poorest COUNTRIES in the WORLD.

Did you know that it would cost less than $4 billion a year to make sure everyone in the world had adequate health care? And every year in Europe, people spend a grand total of $6 billion dollars on ICE CREAM.

Don't give me any sob stories for the rich, I won't be shedding any tears.

woah, huh?! free money, I thought you had to earn a minimum of $3000 to get a check? if there is no minimum, I got like $3.00 interest from my savings account, so even if tey take a dollar for social security, I still win at $300?

@MyCokesBiggerThanYours: I DID read. I'm aware of what an income tax is, thanks. I was just pointing out that it's incorrect to say that the poor do not pay taxes, because they do pay Social Security tax (which is a regressive tax), and sales taxes (which are regressive taxes). You were focusing solely on income tax because it suited your BS argument best. You are also clearly the one who has no understanding of economics, because you seemingly do not understand that rent (paid by the "poor") INCLUDES the cost of real estate taxes paid by the property owner. So yes, the poor DO pay real estate taxes...they just pay them indirectly because the real estate taxes are passed on by their landlords. Just like corporate taxes get passed on to customers.

These checks are for "economic stimulus". The amount of tax paid is irrelevant to the discussion. As I already showed, there are other tax credits that are fully refundable regardless of income tax liability. This is just another of that type of tax credit. You can disagree with me all you want, but your "theories" do not hold water.

What about the poor *rich* people - where's THEIR stimulus package? It's been what - five or six years since uncle Bush gave them their last big goodie bag of free money, and it certainly was more than a measly six hundred dollars.

$600 bucks probably won't even buy a bottle of decent wine for them. We should cry, soon the rich will be drinking "Two Buck Chuck" too. :(