Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-17-2020, 02:48 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 17,539

Instead of payroll tax cut, Trump now plans to send checks directly to Americans, soon


Plan is for a big cash infusion within the next 2 weeks, because the payroll tax cut plan (which effect would take 6-8 months to percolate through the economy and be felt) was criticized as much too slow.
  #2  
Old 03-17-2020, 02:55 PM
Si Amigo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: North of 8 Mile
Posts: 4,287
nm

Last edited by Si Amigo; 03-17-2020 at 02:57 PM.
  #3  
Old 03-17-2020, 03:08 PM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,991
How will Trumpco make a profit from this?
  #4  
Old 03-17-2020, 06:06 PM
Steve MB is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 13,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
How will Trumpco make a profit from this?
He probably sees it as a way to salvage his chance of getting re-elected (and thereby not spending the rest of his days as a guest of the State of New York).
__________________
The Internet: Nobody knows if you're a dog. Everybody knows if you're a jackass.
  #5  
Old 03-17-2020, 10:29 PM
RioRico is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: beyond cell service
Posts: 3,193
Will the checks be issued by his university?
  #6  
Old 03-17-2020, 10:44 PM
Chefguy's Avatar
Chefguy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Portlandia
Posts: 44,098
The payroll tax cut would have taken money from Social Security. Secondly, how do you reduce payroll tax on the thousands of workers who are being laid off? Stupid idea.
  #7  
Old 03-17-2020, 10:50 PM
Kolak of Twilo's Avatar
Kolak of Twilo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Edgewater/Chicago
Posts: 4,089
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chefguy View Post
The payroll tax cut would have taken money from Social Security. Secondly, how do you reduce payroll tax on the thousands of workers who are being laid off? Stupid idea.
Of course it's a stupid idea, Steve Mnuchin suggested it.
  #8  
Old 03-22-2020, 10:42 PM
Patx2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 3,971
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chefguy View Post
The payroll tax cut would have taken money from Social Security. Secondly, how do you reduce payroll tax on the thousands of workers who are being laid off? Stupid idea.
Thank you, my thought exactly. People are laid off, they arenít paying payroll taxes. They need help to keep their families afloat.
  #9  
Old 03-17-2020, 03:54 PM
Aspidistra is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 6,368
Late April, the article says.

That's fine 'n all, but it's not going to help people who want to self-quarantine now pay this month's rent
  #10  
Old 03-17-2020, 11:35 PM
Mnemnosyne is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 379
I'm surprised that anyone on the Republican side is considering anything like this. I heard Romney was in favor of this too. That said, I seriously doubt it'll happen. I can't imagine enough Republicans going along with something that might actually help people to let it pass, especially not McConnell. Though I would be delighted to be proven wrong.
  #11  
Old 03-18-2020, 04:36 AM
Lord Feldon's Avatar
Lord Feldon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 6,873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mnemnosyne View Post
I'm surprised that anyone on the Republican side is considering anything like this.
Why? There's a Republican president, so Republicans are pro-stimulus until at least November.
  #12  
Old 03-18-2020, 06:05 AM
What the .... ?!?! is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 4,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mnemnosyne View Post
I'm surprised that anyone on the Republican side is considering anything like this. I heard Romney was in favor of this too. That said, I seriously doubt it'll happen. I can't imagine enough Republicans going along with something that might actually help people to let it pass, especially not McConnell. Though I would be delighted to be proven wrong.
You aren't really are you?
  #13  
Old 03-18-2020, 06:16 AM
monstro is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 21,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mnemnosyne View Post
I'm surprised that anyone on the Republican side is considering anything like this. I heard Romney was in favor of this too. That said, I seriously doubt it'll happen. I can't imagine enough Republicans going along with something that might actually help people to let it pass, especially not McConnell. Though I would be delighted to be proven wrong.
They think $1000 will make people forget how much the president has screwed the pooch on this thing. History isn't going to be kind to him on a variety of topics, but it is going to salughter him with respect to his initial response to COVID-19. No matter how semi-presidential his pantomiming is now, the receipts showing how much of a monster he is will live forever.

The sad thing is there will be a segment of the population who will manage to give him and his enabling party a mulligan even on this. They will point to their $1000 check as evidence that he tried to do something. I'm sure there are conservatives who still give Hoover props for his feckless efforts too.
  #14  
Old 03-19-2020, 05:11 PM
HMS Irruncible is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 9,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mnemnosyne View Post
I'm surprised that anyone on the Republican side is considering anything like this. I heard Romney was in favor of this too. That said, I seriously doubt it'll happen. I can't imagine enough Republicans going along with something that might actually help people to let it pass, especially not McConnell. Though I would be delighted to be proven wrong.
I would not be surprised if Republicans outright adopted socialism and used it as a cudgel to bend blue states to their will. They'd claim they invented it, they'd call it "Capital Socialism" or hell, maybe drop the fig leaf and make it "National Socialism". Agree to abolish sanctuary cities, let ICE run rampant, and let the government abuse women and minorities, and poof! Universal healthcare for your state.

If anybody could/would pull that off, Trump would be the guy. The Republicans are in a historical moment where they have political license to repeat anything Trump says if it helps them stay in power.

Last edited by HMS Irruncible; 03-19-2020 at 05:13 PM.
  #15  
Old 03-19-2020, 05:21 PM
Alley Dweller's Avatar
Alley Dweller is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,651
Quote:
Originally Posted by HMS Irruncible View Post
I would not be surprised if Republicans outright adopted socialism and used it as a cudgel to bend blue states to their will. They'd claim they invented it, they'd call it "Capital Socialism" or hell, maybe drop the fig leaf and make it "National Socialism".
I really doubt they'd call it anything that had the word "socialism" in it. It would probably be "Working Families Tax Relief" or "Small Business Leadership Funds."
  #16  
Old 03-19-2020, 08:19 PM
RioRico is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: beyond cell service
Posts: 3,193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alley Dweller View Post
I really doubt they'd call it anything that had the word "socialism" in it. It would probably be "Working Families Tax Relief" or "Small Business Leadership Funds."
Such relief and funds will likely funnel into districts with (R) legislators, not areas full of "disloyals". "My" congresscritter sucks rosy Rosebuds so I'll be funded while coastal residents are left to smoke dog turds, as it were. Just to be safe, I'll start a small business selling Tulsi Gabbard campaign souvenirs. What, she dropped out? I'll go bankrupt! Send me more relief checks!
  #17  
Old 03-20-2020, 12:24 AM
Monty's Avatar
Monty is online now
Straight Dope Science Advisory Board
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Beijing, China
Posts: 24,704
Quote:
Originally Posted by HMS Irruncible View Post
They'd claim they invented it, they'd call it "Capital Socialism" or hell, maybe drop the fig leaf and make it "National Socialism".

They'll take a page from the CCP and call it "Capitalism with Republican Characteristics". Isn't that already the crud that Trump's been pulling with things like his government bailout of the farmers he screwed with his totally unnecessary trade war?

Come to think of it, in one sense that son of a worm has been a wartime president since he took office. Of course he's been losing every war he's started.
  #18  
Old 03-20-2020, 07:05 AM
HMS Irruncible is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 9,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty View Post
They'll take a page from the CCP and call it "Capitalism with Republican Characteristics". Isn't that already the crud that Trump's been pulling with things like his government bailout of the farmers he screwed with his totally unnecessary trade war?
I got it... the successor to the Republicans is "The Popular Socialist Party". Trump names Bernie as his new running mate. Bernie plays ball, because he's Bernie. The new administration cuts relief checks to every state who passes a law requiring every abortion clinic to be raised to a height of 100 feet on platinum girders, and remands every undocumented person to ICE to be returned to Mexico by shooting them over the border from a cannon.

Meanwhile the National Review editorial board sits in the corner crying and wondering how they got it so right while everyone else got it so wrong.

Welcome to the reconciliation ticket from hell.

Last edited by HMS Irruncible; 03-20-2020 at 07:07 AM.
  #19  
Old 03-17-2020, 11:39 PM
thelurkinghorror is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Venial Sin City
Posts: 14,305
I don't pay into Social Security, so that would've helped me zero.

Romney also essentially invented Obamacare. Depending on your POV, he either consistently gets denied credit or avoided credit for things people don't like.
  #20  
Old 03-18-2020, 04:24 AM
RioRico is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: beyond cell service
Posts: 3,193
A few questions.
  • Do all Americans have mailing addresses?
  • Do all Americans need a thousand bucks?
  • Will checks be mailed
    • to homeless camps?
    • to homes vacant after eviction?
    • to RVs and trailers in WalMart parking lots?
    • to US citizens out of the country?
    • to households worth over a million bucks;
    • to emptied college dorms?
    • to sanctuary cities?
  • Will recipients lacking bank accounts pay large check-cashing fees?
  • Will thieves follow postal carriers, emptying home mailboxes?
I won't bother asking about inflation. What's another trillion? Pocket change.

If not checks, why not cash-cards? Because same problems as checks. Why not direct deposit? Because not everyone has an account. If the money's there, why not spend it on medical supplies and services? Because that would be unacceptably beneficial. No, printing a trillion bucks and strewing cash from gold helicopters is the only solution.
  #21  
Old 03-18-2020, 06:36 PM
D'Anconia is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 5,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by RioRico View Post
A few questions.
  • Do all Americans have mailing addresses?
  • Do all Americans need a thousand bucks?
  • Will checks be mailed
    • to homeless camps?
    • to homes vacant after eviction?
    • to RVs and trailers in WalMart parking lots?
    • to US citizens out of the country?
    • to households worth over a million bucks;
    • to emptied college dorms?
    • to sanctuary cities?
  • Will recipients lacking bank accounts pay large check-cashing fees?
  • Will thieves follow postal carriers, emptying home mailboxes?
I won't bother asking about inflation. What's another trillion? Pocket change.

If not checks, why not cash-cards? Because same problems as checks. Why not direct deposit? Because not everyone has an account. If the money's there, why not spend it on medical supplies and services? Because that would be unacceptably beneficial. No, printing a trillion bucks and strewing cash from gold helicopters is the only solution.
How was it handled the last time in 2008?
  #22  
Old 03-19-2020, 11:51 AM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by RioRico View Post
A few questions.
  • Do all Americans have mailing addresses?
  • Do all Americans need a thousand bucks?
  • Will checks be mailed
    • to homeless camps?
    • to homes vacant after eviction?
    • to RVs and trailers in WalMart parking lots?
    • to US citizens out of the country?
    • to households worth over a million bucks;
    • to emptied college dorms?
    • to sanctuary cities?
  • Will recipients lacking bank accounts pay large check-cashing fees?
  • Will thieves follow postal carriers, emptying home mailboxes?
I won't bother asking about inflation. What's another trillion? Pocket change.

If not checks, why not cash-cards? Because same problems as checks. Why not direct deposit? Because not everyone has an account. If the money's there, why not spend it on medical supplies and services? Because that would be unacceptably beneficial. No, printing a trillion bucks and strewing cash from gold helicopters is the only solution.
I suspect (and hope even) that the checks will be for people who file tax returns, and sent to that address.
  #23  
Old 03-19-2020, 03:32 PM
RioRico is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: beyond cell service
Posts: 3,193
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
I suspect (and hope even) that the checks will be for people who file tax returns, and sent to that address.
Are people with incomes who file tax returns this year the only recipients? Where do they receive checks if they've been evicted and now live in a van or tent?

Are people with secure addresses those most in need of a couple of kilobucks? Are they likely to repeat the Dubya saga and use the money for savings or debt payment rather than economy-boosting consumption?

I don't expect satisfactory answers for an obvious, absurd bribe-the-voters ploy. The poorest and neediest, those most likely to consume, are left out. Fuck the proles and peasants. They hopefully won't have the strength to revolt, right?
  #24  
Old 03-19-2020, 03:48 PM
Alley Dweller's Avatar
Alley Dweller is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,651
I have no illusions this will happen, but they could set up a fund to deposit unclaimed and undeliverable checks. Use this fund to support food banks and homeless shelters.

But it will never happen.
  #25  
Old 03-20-2020, 09:41 AM
Kimera757 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by RioRico View Post
Are people with incomes who file tax returns this year the only recipients? Where do they receive checks if they've been evicted and now live in a van or tent?
I hear a lot of complaints, but not a lot of solutions.

How would you get money to people who don't file taxes, to the homeless, and so forth? Sending checks or direct deposits through the IRS system is simply the easiest way to do it.
  #26  
Old 03-18-2020, 06:30 AM
Ruken is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: DC
Posts: 8,479
I recall W Bush pushing out payments a ~decade ago. Does anyone recall how that worked? I vaguely recall it being associated with filing my tax return (maybe a refundable credit?) Not a separate mailing.
I don't think the feds even know where I live. I moved last year. Not that I need a check, but I'm not sure how, mechanically, this is supposed to work.
  #27  
Old 03-18-2020, 08:35 AM
MrAtoz is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,768
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruken View Post
I recall W Bush pushing out payments a ~decade ago. Does anyone recall how that worked? I vaguely recall it being associated with filing my tax return (maybe a refundable credit?) Not a separate mailing.
I don't think the feds even know where I live. I moved last year. Not that I need a check, but I'm not sure how, mechanically, this is supposed to work.
What you're remembering is the economic stimulus of 2008, which did indeed take the form of tax rebates. It was, I think, $300 per person, or $600 for a married couple filing jointly. For most people, it was an additional line on the 1040 form when you filed your taxes.

Even earlier, in 2001, the Bush administration sent out "tax rebate" checks, which involved actually mailing checks to, theoretically, every taxpayer in the country. I think the amounts were the same--$300 for individuals, $600 for married filing jointly--and the checks were sent by the IRS, since they had the records of who lived where and who had payed taxes.

So mailing a check to most of the population is at least theoretically possible. Even if this passes through Congress, I'm not sure whether the issuing of those checks could actually happen as quickly as the President is suggesting. From what I remember in 2001, the checks were spread out over several months. I don't think I got mine until about July or August. I don't know how practical it is to mail checks to everyone within just a few weeks.
  #28  
Old 03-18-2020, 12:06 PM
slash2k is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 2,811
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrAtoz View Post
I don't know how practical it is to mail checks to everyone within just a few weeks.
Direct deposit is far more common now than in 2001, of course, so they wouldn't be mailing very many checks at all.
  #29  
Old 03-18-2020, 12:26 PM
MrAtoz is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,768
Quote:
Originally Posted by slash2k View Post
Direct deposit is far more common now than in 2001, of course, so they wouldn't be mailing very many checks at all.
That's true, of course, and I thought about that. Of course, that would require knowing everyone's bank account number and routing number. I suppose the IRS would have that information for anyone who's gotten a tax refund and had it direct deposited. But there are lots of people who didn't get refunds, or who might have changed banks in the meantime, or who just plain don't have bank accounts at all. There would be a lot of logistical challenges.

Plus all the articles I've seen about it seem to say "checks." Maybe that's just shorthand.

Last edited by MrAtoz; 03-18-2020 at 12:31 PM.
  #30  
Old 03-19-2020, 10:39 AM
Keeve is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: NY/NJ, USA
Posts: 5,215
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrAtoz View Post
What you're remembering is the economic stimulus of 2008, which did indeed take the form of tax rebates. It was, I think, $300 per person, or $600 for a married couple filing jointly. For most people, it was an additional line on the 1040 form when you filed your taxes.

Even earlier, in 2001, the Bush administration sent out "tax rebate" checks, which involved actually mailing checks to, theoretically, every taxpayer in the country. I think the amounts were the same--$300 for individuals, $600 for married filing jointly--and the checks were sent by the IRS, since they had the records of who lived where and who had payed taxes.
Many people seem to have forgotten that in the FOLLOWING year, there was a line on the 1040 for the purpose of repaying that loan. There was never any free money given out. The $300/$600 that we got in the first year was deducted in the second.

I'm trying to find out if this is going to happen again. I'll happily take whatever they offer, but I'd like to know NOW, whether it means that next year's refund will be that much smaller.
  #31  
Old 03-19-2020, 11:48 AM
slash2k is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 2,811
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keeve View Post
Many people seem to have forgotten that in the FOLLOWING year, there was a line on the 1040 for the purpose of repaying that loan. There was never any free money given out. The $300/$600 that we got in the first year was deducted in the second.
No, there wasn't; I believe you are the one who has forgotten how it worked. There was a line on the 2008 return (due in 2009) to REPORT how much you received, which enabled those who did not receive the full amount originally to claim an additional credit, but it wasn't a deduction and you did not have to repay anything.

See the 2008 Form 1040, line 70, and the accompanying instructions on pages 61 through 63.
  #32  
Old 03-19-2020, 11:56 AM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keeve View Post
Many people seem to have forgotten that in the FOLLOWING year, there was a line on the 1040 for the purpose of repaying that loan. There was never any free money given out. The $300/$600 that we got in the first year was deducted in the second....
Not quite. IIRC it became taxable then next year, you didnt have to pay it all back, only maybe 28%.
  #33  
Old 03-19-2020, 02:43 PM
Alley Dweller's Avatar
Alley Dweller is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,651
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Not quite. IIRC it became taxable then next year, you didnt have to pay it all back, only maybe 28%.
No it didn't become taxable. No you didn't have to pay ANY of it back.

But if you are sure this was the case, here are all the previous year tax forms and instructions. Please point out where it says you had to do this.

There was a first-time homebuyer credit in 2008 that had to be repaid. But the general rebate that almost everybody got did not.
  #34  
Old 03-18-2020, 11:52 AM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 17,539
Increasing in size! Now the talk is that it may be $2,000 checks being sent out, but with limits so that the wealthy don't qualify to receive them.
  #35  
Old 03-18-2020, 12:38 PM
Skypist's Avatar
Skypist is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 677
I remember getting a check then. I don’t think direct deposit was as much of a thing at that time. Everyone in my office was still taking our paycheck to the bank to deposit it every 2 weeks back then.
  #36  
Old 03-18-2020, 05:48 PM
RioRico is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: beyond cell service
Posts: 3,193
How many millions of Americans now lack bank accounts, homes, mailing addresses, and incomes?
  #37  
Old 03-18-2020, 06:40 PM
RivkahChaya's Avatar
RivkahChaya is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10,874
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skypist View Post
I remember getting a check then. I donít think direct deposit was as much of a thing at that time. Everyone in my office was still taking our paycheck to the bank to deposit it every 2 weeks back then.
Direct Deposit has been around since the 80s, It's just been in the last 10 years or so that employers have insisted upon it.
__________________
"There's always a non-Voodoo explanation for everything." ~Adrian Monk
  #38  
Old 03-18-2020, 07:42 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 47,743
Quote:
Originally Posted by RioRico View Post
How many millions of Americans now lack bank accounts, homes, mailing addresses, and incomes?
You don't need a bank account or an income, assuming the government has your address. Not that many people are going to be losing their houses by April - in California the local governments are forbidding evictions when rent is late due to virus-related reasons.
Which leaves the homeless, and usually giving the homeless $1,000 is not going to be a good idea. There is a move here to use vacant hotel space to house them. Let local governments spend it for them on food, clothing and housing.
  #39  
Old 03-18-2020, 07:47 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 47,743
The criticism of the program the last time it was done was that people used it to pay off debt or add to savings, not for consumption, so it didn't help the economy much. The Obama payroll tax cut was to provide people with an incrementally bigger paycheck which would encourage more consumption. This is based on the behavioral economics concept of buckets that you put money into - windfalls go into a different bucket than paychecks, and gets spent or saved differently. I think Sunstein was responsible.

It really won't help now since it is hard to consume if the stores are closed. Making sure everyone gets unemployment insurance payments will help more. But it is still a lot better idea than the payroll cut under current circumstances.
  #40  
Old 03-18-2020, 08:09 PM
Alley Dweller's Avatar
Alley Dweller is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,651
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post

It really won't help now since it is hard to consume if the stores are closed. Making sure everyone gets unemployment insurance payments will help more. But it is still a lot better idea than the payroll cut under current circumstances.
There is a big difference between now and then: Amazon is open. And they are hiring 100,000 new workers and giving all workers a $2 an hour pay raise.

I am not saying one company will make all the difference. But there are new segments of the economy that can function even if brick and mortar stores fail.
  #41  
Old 03-20-2020, 01:52 PM
weizer2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 8
Quote:
Originally Posted by RioRico View Post
How many millions of Americans now lack bank accounts, homes, mailing addresses, and incomes?
I don't know, why don't you give us a break down?
  #42  
Old 03-20-2020, 03:54 PM
RioRico is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: beyond cell service
Posts: 3,193
Quote:
Originally Posted by weizer2 View Post
I don't know, why don't you give us a break down?
I don't know either, which is why I asked. Have you any information to offer?
  #43  
Old 03-20-2020, 05:53 PM
str8cashhomie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 240
More problematic than the income cap is that non-taxpayers will get less money, with a minimum of $600 in the current GOP bill. It's causing some internal divisions so we'll see.
  #44  
Old 03-20-2020, 06:39 PM
TruCelt's Avatar
TruCelt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Near Washington, DC
Posts: 11,876
It seems to me that this would make for a heckuva good incentive to fill out those census forms. And since this census was teetering on the precipice of disaster to begin with, now that they won't be able to send crews door-to-door, getting a good count will be next to impossible.

These checks could be just the ticket.
  #45  
Old 03-20-2020, 07:12 PM
road_lobo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by weizer2 View Post
I don't know, why don't you give us a break down?
"A rhetorical question is a question you ask where you do not expect the answer, and you are rather asking to make a point."

from https://kidskonnect.com/language/rhetorical-question/
  #46  
Old 03-20-2020, 08:13 PM
RivkahChaya's Avatar
RivkahChaya is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10,874
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skypist View Post
I remember getting a check then. I donít think direct deposit was as much of a thing at that time. Everyone in my office was still taking our paycheck to the bank to deposit it every 2 weeks back then.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
......It's $2,000 more than we would have gotten otherwise.
Ex-fucking-zactly.


Turns out I'm screwed. It's based on your 2018 income. In 2018, I inherited quite a lot of money from my mother, and it pushes me above the amount to get the $1,200. But that's the only year I've gained even HALF that amount. Now, I still have quite a lot of it, but you can't live on capital forever, and I'm not working (unless my background check with Amazon Flex clears). I'm certainly not making anything like it THIS year.
__________________
"There's always a non-Voodoo explanation for everything." ~Adrian Monk
  #47  
Old 03-20-2020, 10:07 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by RivkahChaya View Post
Ex-fucking-zactly.


Turns out I'm screwed. It's based on your 2018 income. In 2018, I inherited quite a lot of money from my mother, and it pushes me above the amount to get the $1,200. But that's the only year I've gained even HALF that amount. Now, I still have quite a lot of it, but you can't live on capital forever, and I'm not working (unless my background check with Amazon Flex clears). I'm certainly not making anything like it THIS year.
Inheritances arent taxable?

Income from what you got from the inheritance?
  #48  
Old 03-20-2020, 11:15 PM
D'Anconia is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 5,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by RivkahChaya View Post
Ex-fucking-zactly.


Turns out I'm screwed. It's based on your 2018 income. In 2018, I inherited quite a lot of money from my mother, and it pushes me above the amount to get the $1,200. But that's the only year I've gained even HALF that amount. Now, I still have quite a lot of it, but you can't live on capital forever, and I'm not working (unless my background check with Amazon Flex clears). I'm certainly not making anything like it THIS year.
Inheritance is not considered income.

https://turbotax.intuit.com/tax-tips...axes/L653s0Kyn
  #49  
Old 03-20-2020, 02:17 PM
MortSahlFan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: US
Posts: 906
Quote:
Originally Posted by RioRico View Post
How many millions of Americans now lack bank accounts, homes, mailing addresses, and incomes?
Many
  #50  
Old 03-18-2020, 11:35 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 17,539
Details are out: Democratic and Republican senators have tentatively agreed on a package to send "$2,000 to every American earning less than a million dollars per year."

I was hoping it would have been limited more, so that those who earn $300-999k are also disqualified, but it is what it is.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:44 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017