get your $1200 in may .. whoopdeedoo

Well, my proof is at home - I'll try to post it later tonight.

Yes, its more boring number analysis, but I'll add some charts for stroh 

OK, I think I have it confirmed.

The tax rate on the first $6000 earned has been changed for 2008: dropped from 10% to ZERO.  So your total tax liability (the amount you owe on your income, according to the tables and before any credits or payments made) will be reduced by $600 in 2008.  You're getting that money now; I'd call that economic stimulus check a Tax-Year-2008 "pre-refund".

Form 1040, line 37 = adjusted gross income.
Form 1040, line 43 = taxable income (AGI minus certain deductions and exemptions).
Form 1040, line 44 = tax liability based on taxable income (line 43).
Form 1040, lines 58-63 = other lines to enter additional tax obligations; my guess is that this is the section where you have to enter the "pre-refunded" $600.

So ... come early 2009, when you're filing that 1040 on your calendar-year 2008 income, you'll have to apply a $600/person debit below the line

• If your net would have been a refund of >$600, you get [calculated refund due minus $600];
• If your net would have been a refund of exactly $600, you get nothing [calculated refund due minus $600];
• If your net would have been a refund of <$600, you OWE [calculated refund due minus $600]; and
• If your net would have been a debt of any amount, you OWE [calculated debt due plus $600].

Bottom line: Stroh hates Menard's.

If it's like last time the prebate is simply calculated as income for the following year and possibly won't affect your obligation at all.  If it does, minimally so.

Unless I misremember.   

well, throwing some #'s completely off the top of my head (as i can't remember the exact tax rates/thresholds)   let's give a semi-reasonable hypothetical

married couple making 100k gets some small rate adjustment that lowers their net effective rate to say 18.0% vs 20.% .  They now have 2000 more to spend/save/invest  hypothethically  .  Their effective spending capability went up  2.5 %.  Basically enough to skip 1 mortgage payment.

rich CEO asshat making $10M gets dropped from 39.x % to 35% top rate which should make his effective rate about 34% instead of 39%.   he now has about 450,000 more to spend/save/invest.  His effective spending capability went up  7.5%  . Putting that in a crappy CD alone would net him $25-30k  in one year.   (nevermind he'll use it to buy stock options in his company, then run it into the ground and become a mega-billionaire  ) .   That 'tax cut' 1 year interest from a CD would pay couple 1's mortgage for a year.    And that 1 year tax savings would be enough to put couple #1's kids through college. or repave a mile of road.  or buy a couple of heart transplants.  or possibly fund research into alternative energy materials by promising post-docs    Instead it will be used to turn his millions into billions. or a yacht.     Which has the greater overall societal good?  Tough call.



And yeh, that's not the 'whole' or the 'end' of the story.  Just putting some #'s on it.

So um yeh

yeh, that's what I was figuring.  I personally (my small anecdotal circle of friends/family/etc) who will be in situations like/near this.  Yearly get a little back.  This year, will get a 'lot' back .  Next year will get a nice surprise shaft.  I'll start warning them now.   Invest. *fudge* the 'econononomonomonee

But I need to verify the payback scenario.  It may well be that if you end up owing (without considering the $600), IRS doesn't add the $600 to your debt.  If so, I'm definitely changing my W-4 for 2008.

So what's your point?  You should pay less taxes but Rich Asshats should pay what they already pay (or more?)?  Why don't we just hold your rate constant and crank the rate on Rich Asshats?  Wait, didn't we just have this thread a couple weeks ago?

If I may ask: where, numerically, do you draw the line between honest, hardworking, unassuming Americans and Rich Asshats?