|
Posted by Ed on March 6, 2008, 9:41 pm
Please log in for more thread options
Is the following correct or am I still off in some dream world
somewhere?
If the taxpayer has at least $1 tax liability:
Filing status Qualifying income Tax liability
Payment Children<17
Single/MFS 8750 or more 1 - 300
300 300
301 -
599 Tax liability 300
600 or more
600 300
The tax liability and payment numbers are the same for HOH and QW but
the qualifying income numbers are 11250 and 14100. For MFJ its 17500
and 1-600 (600), 601-1199 (tax liability), and 1200 or more (1200)
plus 300 per qualifying child.
If a person does not meet the qualifying income test or has no tax
liability, but they have at least 3000 in qualifying income, they will
receive the minimum payment of 300 (600 MFJ) plus 300 per qualifying
child.
All I'm trying to do is develop a simple look-up table that could
replace paragraph after paragraph of confusing text.
--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >>
<< nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >>
<< that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >>
<< >>
<< The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >>
<< to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >>
<< are at www.asktax.org. >>
<< Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
|
|
Posted by Bill Brown on March 6, 2008, 9:54 pm
Please log in for more thread options
> So much for avoiding IRS-speak and CPA-talk! ;-)
Alan's explanation is as clear and concise as you're going to get.
--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >>
<< nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >>
<< that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >>
<< >>
<< The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >>
<< to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >>
<< are at www.asktax.org. >>
<< Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
|
|
Posted by Mark Bole on March 7, 2008, 3:35 pm
Please log in for more thread options Bill Brown wrote:
>
>> So much for avoiding IRS-speak and CPA-talk! ;-)
>
> Alan's explanation is as clear and concise as you're going to get.
>
Which affirms my point, namely what the OP is asking for doesn't exist.
Although Alan stated "the payment is not a rebate", a rebate is exactly
what a story today from Associated Press ("Rebate letters to cost $42
million"), as well as Turbotax and H&R Block, are calling the payments.
-Mark Bole
--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >>
<< nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >>
<< that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >>
<< >>
<< The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >>
<< to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >>
<< are at www.asktax.org. >>
<< Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
|
|
Posted by Stuart Bronstein on March 7, 2008, 3:43 pm
Please log in for more thread options > Bill Brown wrote:
>>
>>> So much for avoiding IRS-speak and CPA-talk! ;-)
>>
>> Alan's explanation is as clear and concise as you're going to
>> get.
>
> Which affirms my point, namely what the OP is asking for doesn't
> exist.
>
> Although Alan stated "the payment is not a rebate", a rebate is
> exactly what a story today from Associated Press ("Rebate letters
> to cost $42 million"), as well as Turbotax and H&R Block, are
> calling the payments.
I remember seeing a story on the news a couple of weeks ago. Some
psychologists were interviewed, and they said that studies show that if
it's called a "rebate" people are more likely to save it, while if they
called it something like a "bonus distribution" people are more likely
to spend it.
Stu
--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >>
<< nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >>
<< that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >>
<< >>
<< The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >>
<< to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >>
<< are at www.asktax.org. >>
<< Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
|
|
Posted by Alan on March 7, 2008, 9:29 pm
Please log in for more thread options Mark Bole wrote:
> Bill Brown wrote:
>>
>>> So much for avoiding IRS-speak and CPA-talk! ;-)
>>
>> Alan's explanation is as clear and concise as you're going to get.
>>
>
> Which affirms my point, namely what the OP is asking for doesn't exist.
>
> Although Alan stated "the payment is not a rebate", a rebate is exactly
> what a story today from Associated Press ("Rebate letters to cost $42
> million"), as well as Turbotax and H&R Block, are calling the payments.
>
> -Mark Bole
>
My last post on this subject:
A rebate is a return or refund on something you have already
paid. The stimulus payment is therefore not a rebate as it is
not a return of any taxes you already paid. Congress & the Pres.
created a refundable tax credit for tax year 2008. You will see
this tax credit on your 2008 tax return. They then gave the US
Treasury permission to send you this refundable tax credit in
advance of your having to file your 2008 tax return to obtain it.
If the advance payment is larger than your 2008 tax credit....
your in luck as you don't have to pay it back. If your tax
situation in 2008 generates a credit that is larger than your
advance payment, your in luck again as you will get to use the
excess to reduce your 2008 taxes.
--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >>
<< nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >>
<< that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >>
<< >>
<< The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >>
<< to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >>
<< are at www.asktax.org. >>
<< Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Stimulus payment | March 1, 2008, 6:06 pm |
| Stimulus Payment for Teenager | March 21, 2008, 3:51 pm |
| Interpreting stimulus payment notice | May 7, 2008, 12:24 pm |
| Regarding stimulus payment, help me understand Net Income Tax Liability | May 9, 2008, 10:20 pm |
| "Tax controversy topic" needed for term research paper .. | February 17, 2007, 4:58 am |
| "Tax controversy topic" needed for term research paper .. | March 15, 2007, 1:09 am |
| Re-Post | April 9, 2008, 8:01 pm |
| Post-Tax 401-K Contributions | April 18, 2008, 6:13 pm |
| When do tax laws become "final"? | May 28, 2008, 12:50 pm |
| Comingling pre/post-tax contributions in IRA | September 6, 2007, 9:34 pm |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap