Here Comes Your Stimulus Bonus

[cassi9879 20]

Here Comes Your Stimulus Bonus

by Jeanne Sahadi

Tuesday, March 31, 2009provided by Employers should be ready for the Making Work Pay credit by Wednesday. That means some extra take-home pay. Here's what you need to know.

You're likely to see some more green in the next couple of weeks. Not only on the trees. Very possibly in your wallet, too.

President Obama has asked that all employers adjust their payroll systems by Wednesday so eligible workers can start receiving the new Making Work Pay tax credit through their paychecks. The credit, available for 2009 and 2010, was a part of the economic recovery package lawmakers passed in February.

Just how much extra cash you will see depends on your marital status, your salary and how many allowances -- or exemptions -- you normally take.

As a rough guide, singles eligible for the credit might get between $10 to $15 per paycheck if paid weekly; for those married filing jointly, they're likely to see an extra $15 to $20.

Continued on Yahoo! Finance

[fozzie 41]

I guess its a way to give me more money without the government actually paying for it now. Its a future tax break. I preferred the bush method of giving me a check for $600!

[cassi9879 20]

Yeah, and if we work 2 jobs we'll be overpaid on the credit and have to pay it back! This is a bunch of BS to me!

[Nagishkaw 510]

I guess its a way to give me more money without the government actually paying for it now. Its a future tax break. I preferred the bush method of giving me a check for $600!

Me too.

[Dan J 277]

I guess its a way to give me more money without the government actually paying for it now. Its a future tax break. I preferred the bush method of giving me a check for $600!

Its actually less effective. Since most people wont consider a check like that as part of their normal income, they tend to splurge on foreign made goods. This way, slightly less money is being taken out in taxes, which will make it more likely that it will be spend on necessities here. Like housing, food or transportation.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

There's more stimulus money out there than the few measely bucks in the coming paychecks.

I'm looking at roughly 1,200.00 next spring when I get that tax credit for the new high efficiency A/C system I just put into my house. Not that I did it for the stimulus money but the 30% tax credit available on high efficiency systems made it fairly easy for me to opt for the new unit instead of having the old one repaired when it went out last week. With the credit, the difference between the brand new system and the repair of the exisiting one was in the range of 1,500.00 which I should save in electric bills alone over the next 4 years or so.

And I get to feel green.

[I'm Gone 60]

preferred the bush method of giving me a check for $600!

Yes, that was already in place and this time it has been made much more complicated. Employers probably have to paid someone to adjust their withholding and then change it back when this ends. It was much simpler to have people file a 1040.

[cassi9879 20]

I can only imagine the chaos it'll create for us tax preparers next season.

[I'm Gone 60]

I guess its a way to give me more money without the government actually paying for it now. Its a future tax break. I preferred the bush method of giving me a check for $600!

Its actually less effective. Since most people wont consider a check like that as part of their normal income, they tend to splurge on foreign made goods. This way, slightly less money is being taken out in taxes, which will make it more likely that it will be spend on necessities here. Like housing, food or transportation.

Well wasn't stimulating the economy the idea, not paying your gas and electric bill or filling up your car with gas.

[fozzie 41]

I guess its a way to give me more money without the government actually paying for it now. Its a future tax break. I preferred the bush method of giving me a check for $600!

Its actually less effective. Since most people wont consider a check like that as part of their normal income, they tend to splurge on foreign made goods. This way, slightly less money is being taken out in taxes, which will make it more likely that it will be spend on necessities here. Like housing, food or transportation.

Well wasn't stimulating the economy the idea, not paying your gas and electric bill or filling up your car with gas.

I understand Dan+Gemvita's point. You either get a $600 check and 1) Save it or 2) buy something you ordinarily would not have bought, or under the new stimulus you have more money in each paycheck, albeit a small amount, which to some people that live from paycheck to paycheck it will be better. However, the problem is not those that have jobs...its the increasing number that don't. I don't "need" an economic stimulus but $600 to me is better than $30 a paycheck.

Edited March 31, 2009 by fozzie

[cassi9879 20]

Most probably won't even notice the difference in their paycheck.

I think it creates more of a hassle for employers having to adjust tax rates in the middle of the year.

Edited March 31, 2009 by cassi9879

[Heracles 417]

$15. Why bother?

Why not keep it an use it to improve this country and modernize the laughable infrastructure? AKA stimulating the economy to create jobs while improving living standards. Something we realized overseas a good 20 years ago.

Edited March 31, 2009 by Constellation

[fozzie 41]

Most probably won't even notice the difference in their paycheck.

By the same token most would not notice a $30 increase. The difference is that you would not hear the end of it.

[cassi9879 20]

Why not put this measly extra amount towards this universal healthcare plan Obama talked about in his campaign?

[Dan J 277]

I guess its a way to give me more money without the government actually paying for it now. Its a future tax break. I preferred the bush method of giving me a check for $600!

Its actually less effective. Since most people wont consider a check like that as part of their normal income, they tend to splurge on foreign made goods. This way, slightly less money is being taken out in taxes, which will make it more likely that it will be spend on necessities here. Like housing, food or transportation.

Well wasn't stimulating the economy the idea, not paying your gas and electric bill or filling up your car with gas.

Tax breaks of any kind are probably the worst way to stimulate the economy, especially when consumer confidence is not very high. But its a populist measure, to make people happy while working through more effective means to stimulate the economy.

Paying for your gas and electric or filling up your car with gas is stimulating the economy. So is buying a TV made in China. In the big picture, its the global economy that we are concerned about, though most people can't see past their own economic situation or the economy of their particular city or region.

A one time tax refund is not very effective as it only creates a one time jolt, most of which wont get reinvested. Pretty much everyone will take the money and either save it, pay off debt, or use it to fund a large one time purchase. Only a portion of the money used for the one time purchase will get reinvested, and not all of it will be in the US. The rest will be held in reserves by the company, or shareholders, who are not likely to take a lot of risks in reinvesting it with the current economy.

A small tax break over time is more effective as people will see it as more a part of their income instead of a one time payment. With that, the money is more likely going to handle needs and that will tend to keep more money in local economies. Its still not as effective, but more effective than the other option.

Why not put this measly extra amount towards this universal healthcare plan Obama talked about in his campaign?

Tax cuts or tax rebates are politically popular. Even though in the big picture they are not very effective.