Bush said he would sign the final plan, which he called "robust, broad-based, timely, and it will be effective." The compromise, he said in a statement after the Senate acted, was "an example of bipartisan cooperation at a time when the American people most expect it."

The legislation would deliver rebates -- $600 for individuals, $1,200 for couples -- to most taxpayers, plus an additional $300 per child. Individuals making up to $75,000 a year and couples earning up to $150,000 would get the full rebate, with those making more than that or too little to owe taxes getting smaller checks.

People who paid no income taxes but earned at least $3,000 -- including through Social Security or veterans' disability benefits -- would get a $300 rebate.

"We believe the stimulus, the way it is targeted, will put money into the hands of those who will spend it immediately, injecting demand into the economy and therefore creating jobs," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., told colleagues.

Full article at Atlanta News, Sports, Atlanta Weather, Business News | ajc.com.

I've shared my opinion here before that while I don't mind paying more taxes than someone who makes less money, I do mind paying a higher percentage. My husband and I will be some of the other ripped off people receiving only a partial rebate, and as a matter of principle, it really pisses me off. REALLY.

We have worked hard vocationally and educationally to get where we are today. My student loans (which I only took out my first four years of college) are my second largest debt next to my mortgage. Of course, I don't get jack of a deduction from the interest - income is too high, even though I paid more in student loan interest ALONE than many people made this year. Another place I'm ripped off.

It truly feels like we are penalized for having an income above the magical cutoff. We have worked hard to get here, and work hard for our money, we have tried to better ourselves and strive to be top producers in our fields, which happen to be well-paid fields, and because of our work, we get penalized. While others - including (I fully recognize there are lots of degrees in "others" and this is just one part) those who don't work hard, don't worry about furthering (or even having) careers, etc. get handouts.

"Well, they need the money more than you do." (What I've heard countless times that discussion on this has come up)...

... Maybe so, but there are people out there who need the money less than I do, and I would think it unfair if I received something and they did not. And I really have to question "need." No one will convince me that most families will spend this money on things that are truly needed like...what... groceries, utilities, medication. I observed about 12 people at work talking about this rebate, and the consensus purchases were things like bigger TVs, game systems ("rock band" - whatever that is), jewelret... you know, the things that will put the money imemdiately into the economy. People don't need those things. If $600 makes or breaks you financially, then you NEED to pay off some debt or rearrange your financial situation, a higher paying job... lots of possibilities here, but you don't need a freaking XBOX. That's not what most people are going to do with this money, so it has jack shit to do with need and that's admitted freely in the purpose statement for this rebate.

Where oh where is my consumption-based tax?!? Oh yeah, not one of the forerunners, that's where. :biggrin:

but, wheet, you have money, you dont need any more ... :smile:

someone actually had the nerve to tell me this. since my very dear DH works his ass off and makes enough money to disqualify us for the 'rebate' (aka tax advance), i should just be happy about that.

please! i have bills just like they do. mortgage, cars, etc ... just cause you charge everything and have to pay your bills with the rebate and i dont have those doesnt mean that we couldnt use the money...

GRRRRRRRRRRR. i guess we need to be penalized for being educated and fiscally responsible

(no, not upset - at all)

Full article at Atlanta News, Sports, Atlanta Weather, Business News | ajc.com.

I've shared my opinion here before that while I don't mind paying more taxes than someone who makes less money, I do mind paying a higher percentage. My husband and I will be some of the other ripped off people receiving only a partial rebate, and as a matter of principle, it really pisses me off. REALLY.

We have worked hard vocationally and educationally to get where we are today. My student loans (which I only took out my first four years of college) are my second largest debt next to my mortgage. Of course, I don't get jack of a deduction from the interest - income is too high, even though I paid more in student loan interest ALONE than many people made this year. Another place I'm ripped off.

It truly feels like we are penalized for having an income above the magical cutoff. We have worked hard to get here, and work hard for our money, we have tried to better ourselves and strive to be top producers in our fields, which happen to be well-paid fields, and because of our work, we get penalized. While others - including (I fully recognize there are lots of degrees in "others" and this is just one part) those who don't work hard, don't worry about furthering (or even having) careers, etc. get handouts.

"Well, they need the money more than you do." (What I've heard countless times that discussion on this has come up)...

... Maybe so, but there are people out there who need the money less than I do, and I would think it unfair if I received something and they did not. And I really have to question "need." No one will convince me that most families will spend this money on things that are truly needed like...what... groceries, utilities, medication. I observed about 12 people at work talking about this rebate, and the consensus purchases were things like bigger TVs, game systems ("rock band" - whatever that is), jewelret... you know, the things that will put the money imemdiately into the economy. People don't need those things. If $600 makes or breaks you financially, then you NEED to pay off some debt or rearrange your financial situation, a higher paying job... lots of possibilities here, but you don't need a freaking XBOX. That's not what most people are going to do with this money, so it has jack shit to do with need and that's admitted freely in the purpose statement for this rebate.

Where oh where is my consumption-based tax?!? Oh yeah, not one of the forerunners, that's where. :seeya:

Oh no Whee! if I didn't know better, I wouldn't think you are a democrat!:smile: you know..., more for the poor, less for the rich...or the rest....:hurray: which in my opinion it is a very ridiculous and innacurate label that some have given the republicans... but that's a whole different story/thread....

Hey, I agree with you! This rebate does feel like a penalty for some...specially for the ones that have tried the hardest on their education, etc... also, I don't think that those who didn't contribute should get a rebate... I know many will appreciate the money/help and for that I'm happy, nothing wrong with helping...but really... that doesn't seem fair either to the tax payers.....:thumbup:

I think everyone should either be taxed at an equal rate (e.g. flat tax) or based on consumption. Which isn't that far from equal. Either way, you're going to pay in more if you make more money, but you aren't assigned a higher percentage. The whole higher percentage thing is the kicker for me. That and salary-based disqualification for deductions. Either everyone can claim their student loan interest, or no one can.

I can't really subscrine to either party. :smile:

Does anyone know if the 87,500 cutoff is your adjusted income or your gross income?? I might actually qualify since I put so much in my sinking retirement fund.

I probably won't end up with anything either, oh well, thats what I get for going to college and not breeding like a rabbit.

Does anyone know if the 87,500 cutoff is your adjusted income or your gross income??

It's a 75,000 cutoff that applies to AGI. Contributions to 401k and health savings do not count toward the limits.

The bigger kicker -- once you pass $87k individual/$174k couples, you're beyond the maximum for any rebate. So you can automatically count on getting ZIP.

I totally agree. I think that it should be straight tax. People who make more money typically make more money because they've SPENT more money on education. This is not ALWAYS true, I know that, but I don't think someone with a bigger paycheck than me should have to pay more taxes than me, that's ridiculous.

I figure we'll just be sending it back to them in June with our quarterly tax payment . . . it all sounds like a big political gambit to me. "We're the government and we're here to help you . . .?"

This whole scheme is utterly harebrained to me, like much of what our government does. Any economist will tell you that the economy takes TIME to recover from ups and downs, that things like the housing bubble and subprime crisis will be with us for a while. So why on EARTH does our stupid, asinine government try giving people a quick injection of cash to fix these problems? It's absolutely mindblowing, and I just can't pay attention because it all ticks me off too much.

Great point, Alexandra. Did we see much difference in '01? Not that I know of. I didn't even get into the "makes sense" side of it.

They want to inject this money so people will spend, therefore creating more jobs. Higher employment rates are their short-term goals. I'm no macro economist, but I just don't see $600 p/p doing that. It's going to be so spread out in so many areas, I think it would just diffuse away.

a lot of people are forgetting that this isn't a handout. it will reduce what you would otherwise get back if you get a refund when you file, or in the case of a previous poster, go toward their quarterly payment.

They want to inject this money so people will spend, therefore creating more jobs. Higher employment rates are their short-term goals.

Yep, and really the only reason they want higher employment rates RIGHT NOW is so that the current administration can get one (very tiny) feather for its cap. The hell with the future, or with the present making any kind of sense.

It's just like what happens with companies when their purpose stops being whatever they went into business to do (sell shoes, for example) and starts being about nothing so much as their share price. It kills me to hear CEOs talking about their responsibilities to their shareholders--what about their responsibilities to their CUSTOMERS? Screw the customers, unless they hold stock their opinions matter not at all.

So with this "rebate." Screw the country, all we care about is votes.

It is to vomit.

a lot of people are forgetting that this isn't a handout. it will reduce what you would otherwise get back if you get a refund when you file, or in the case of a previous poster, go toward their quarterly payment.

I've actually heard that this is not the case this time. Another poster elsewhere quoted someone as stating that it will have no effect on 2008 taxable income.

Guess we'll find out when the time comes.

Here's irony - a few lives ago I worked at the H&R Block corporate offices, and the CEO (at the time at least, couldn't tell you if he's still there or not) used to always talk about how his, and therefore our, only responsibility was to deliver profit to the stakeholders.

They just laid off a few hundred people, and let's not even try to count the lawsuits. Coincidence?

Well, I fall into the range of people that should be getting the full rebate, but I think that has a lot to with my age, because I am working on my career and just need to work my way up... But I completely agree with what has been said here.

I agree that it should be a relatively 'all or nothing' policy... interest on loans was mentioned, you can either claim it, or not, true for everyone, period. And that it should be a percentage based on your income, if you make more, you'll pay more, but in $, not in %.

I also don't get why people who aren't paying taxes would get a 'rebate'.

BTW, on Feb 11 Peggy Riley, an IRS media relations specialist, was asked about the '08 taxable status of the rebate. She replied, "We still do not have information available about the economic stimulus checks yet, be sure to check Internal Revenue Service for updated information."

Everything I've read indicates it WILL be reportable on '08 taxes, but oddly enough I couldn't find anything at irs.gov to verify or refute this.