US Senate plan lets higher income earners share rebates

Source: AP

A senior Senate Republican swung behind a plan to make individuals with annual incomes of up to$150,000 and couples with incomes up to $300,000 eligible for rebates of $500 and $1,000. Qualifying families would get $300 more for each child.

The proposed eligibility ceilings in a new bill put forth by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus compare with income caps of $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 for couples in an economic stimulus bill passed Wednesday by the House of Representatives.

. . .

In addition to expanding eligibility ceilings, the measure by Baucus, a Democrat, also would expand eligibility to 20 million senior citizens on government pension checks and extend unemployment benefits.

Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa, the senior Republican on the Finance Committee, said Wednesday he will support Baucus' bill to pump $196 billion into the economy over the next two years. The committee was to vote on the bill later Wednesday and the measure was expected to reach the Senate floor promptly.
«It's going to be presented as a bipartisan (bill),» Grassley said.

Read more: http://www.pr-inside.com/us-senate-plan-lets-higher-income-r413729.htm

---

Good. Nice to see they are planning to include the Seniors who were excluded from the House bill.

is this really necessary?

The article says GOPers will only sign on if the higher incomers are included, as if a single person making $150,000 is going to quickly buy something new just because they have another $500 in their pocket.

But the high incomers are a GOPer requirement.

Jeebus that's beyond stupid....

It should be called "How to shoot yourself in the ass in an election year"...

:eyes:

would fall into that income range. And could quite possibly be living preatty close to paycheck to paycheck. Especially if they have kids and/or live in certain areas of the US such as NYC, San Fran, etc.

A couple earning 300000/yr and living paycheck to paycheck, must have affluenza. It happens all the time, but that doesn't make you poor.
Loose the car lease and the countryclub, or the exotic vacation etc. Then we can have a discussion

The cutoff was only $150k/yr for married filing jointly. Heck two engineers straight out of school make almost that. And in some professions appearance does matter. Would you really trust your life to a Nurosurgeon that drove an old beat up Yugo?

Edit to add
A couple of Dr's with combined student loans of around $600K could be looking at loan payments of over $5k/month or $60k/yr.

and I would be living as I am today, but without debt and with a modest and growing savings account.

But I'm a postal worker in a plant, and manual laborers such as myself don't deserve that level of pay :eyes:

You would still be only one unintended event away from poverty.
On your way to being wealthy, but not arrived yet. When you have an additional$50k/yr in unearned income then you might be wealthy.

needy in our small town of 1200 people on the Southern Oregon Coast. No job growth, salmon fishing ruined, government cutbacks, with my extra money I will be helping the poor, which are growing in number day by day. Kick the Republican bastards out of office, they have ruined this nation.

My grandfather once taught me to always donate anonomously and if you the attention from donating, you are not doing it for the right reason.

And by all means, lets make sure people making LOTS of money get more money back than those pesky poor people. This Congress can bite me. What a bunch of losers. How on earth are we going to pay for this????

were still being debated.

So the answer to your question is, maybe yes, maybe no.

refundable rebate.

If anyone were really interested in getting the economy going again, they would be working to get our jobs back and manufacturing going again in this country with living wage jobs and without CEO's making 400%+ more than their employees.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7d9_1201723934
Is it true or is the source of the story not to be trusted?

then they would be included.

But nice to see you call them by the bigoted right winger term of

illegals.


They are people who pay taxes and contribute to our society and deserve more than to be lumped together under a right winger bigoted derogatory term.

Under the house's plan, everybody who files a return and qualifies, would get the check. However, many illegals do file, but do NOT use a social security number (as they don't have one). Instead, they use a TIN (taxpayer identification number). These were originally created for foreigners who invested in the US and owed taxes, but didn't have a SSN. In the last 10-20 years, they have been used almost exclusively by illegals.

Thus, the Senate wants to exclude returns with a TIN from the bill. Can't say I have a problem with it, as shipping billions of dollars to Mexico won't do much to stimulate our economy.

yep, and the poor and middle class get screwed. again.

I read the reply about a 2 new MD household making a bare, what was it? 300,000 or so? and having student loans to repay... Good God, most likely, depending on the local cost of living, that still seems excessive for them to need the little rebate as much as a lower or middle income person/family! (oh, the poor MDs???) Give me a break! How about the poor nursing assistants making $15000! They need it far more!!!!

I believe the Senate SS inclusion may include disability SS and the Senate bill also broadened the House proposal by including 250,000 disabled veterans that had been excluded.

So again, maybe yes and maybe no.

A key committee in the US Senate has approved a different version of the economic stimulus plan, setting up a possible showdown with President Bush.

The Senate plan provides additional money to retired people and veterans who were excluded from Mr Bush's plan.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7219559.stm

....or wasn't anyone paying attention then.

Frankly, I think the whole thing is a desperate attempt to improve the approval ratings of an very unpopular outgoing President and an even more unpopular Congress. We need solutions, not bribes.

The Senate bill also extends unemployment insurance benefits....at least something useful.