Discussion:Dumb question - these tax rebates coming are NOT going to be taxable, right?

From TaxAlmanac, A Free Online Resource
Note: You are using this website at your own risk, subject to our Disclaimer and Website Use and Contribution Terms.

From TaxAlmanac

Jump to: navigation, search

Discussion Forum Index --> Basic Tax Questions --> Dumb question - these tax rebates coming are NOT going to be taxable, right?
Discussion Forum Index --> Tax Questions --> Dumb question - these tax rebates coming are NOT going to be taxable, right?

Kendrick (talk|edits) said:

4 March 2008
People keep asking me, and though I am sure they are not, just wanted to make sure. Thanks.

Szptax (talk|edits) said:

4 March 2008
As I understand the rebate it is an advance of the tax refund taxpayers expect in 2008. Therefore there should be no tax on it.

Bottom Line (talk|edits) said:

4 March 2008
No, it is not taxable BUT it will reduce next year's refund or make them owe more. I'm warning all mine that I've seen and will see this tax season. I'm also telling them that they will be getting a letter from the IRS in the mail in the next couple of weeks (that way my phone will ring less from panicked people). Had one say "I don't want the money if I have to give it back. Can I just send the check back?" I reminded them that this is the government we're dealing with and they wouldn't know how to handle it. Client said he would put it in the savings account so it would be available to send back this time next year.

Lalva (talk|edits) said:

4 March 2008
This is an excerpt from the IRS:


"IRS explains myths and facts about economic stimulus rebate payments Amidst ongoing confusion about the impending tax rebate payments, the IRS has provided this list of myths vs. facts to help clear up questions and protect taxpayers from becoming victims of scams: MYTH – The Stimulus Payment will reduce a taxpayer's 2008 refund. FACT – The payment will NOT reduce refunds or increase the amount owed when a 2008 return is filed..."

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

4 March 2008
we've already discussed that that particular IRS statement IS NOT TRUE, Lavla. If they don't get the prebate/refund this year, they will receive a credit on their 2008 return, therefore, the 'prebate' could indeed reduce the amount of refund they would get on their 2008 return.

Again, the IRS is NOT telling the whole story.

Bottom Line (talk|edits) said:

4 March 2008
I guess the IRS clearing up a myth, is a myth Image:smile.jpg

Lalva (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
Oh! I should start reading more TAXALMANAC and less the IRS website ;-)

Szptax (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
its governments doublespeak - it will not change their 2008 tax liability, is what the IRS should say - using anticipated withholdings or planned quarterly estimates, it may change the amount the taxpayer would expect to owe or the amount of their refund since they received an projected/assumed refund in advance of filing the return. In other words - if they usually over withhold by "x", they will receive a refund of x - the prebate. This may cause them to receive less than planned or owe with their return.

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
but the mechanics of making this work in 2008 would require that the amount that should have been received, but wasn't, be treated as a refundable credit. Thus a higher refund if you didn't get all of 'yours' earlier, or by comparison, a lower one if you already received all you are 'entitled' to receive.

Szptax (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
exactly - and I will have that situation for 1 client & prob many more. I would think that the line for this on the 08 taxes would be somewhere near the end of the return - like the telephone tax rebate. Can't wait until we ask what advance rebate the taxpayer received & we get a blank stare & "I don't know, can't you figure that out?"- I wonder if the IRS will have a tax reporting mechanism for this? Our $$$ at work....

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
last time they did it about mid-tax season they had a phone line to call in to check, didn't they?

Szptax (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
I cannot recall - I think you might be right. To get your refund processing info you need the ssn & amount, so maybe thats how they's do it? Match the ssn & the prior year (07) tax liability? makes sense...

Kendrick (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
What?!?!?! So the taxpayer essentially pays the $600 - or whatever he/she qualifies for on a rebate - back to the IRS on his 2008 return?

How about the old lady I filed a return for who only has Social Security and hasn't filed in 20 years? I of course filed for her to get her her $300. She going to have to pay that back?

I am bemused. Besides Lavla, can anyone direct me anywhere that explains exactly how the rebate affects my clients' 2008 tax returns?

Bottom Line (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
It's a freeby for the little old lady. For those that would normally have to pay taxes, it will affect the amount that they owe or will get back. Example 1- person normally gets a refund of $1,000; next year they will get a refund of only $400 because they got $600 in June. Example 2 - person normally pays $500; next year they will have to pay $1,100 because they got $600 in June.

It's pretty much the same as 2001. We had lots of problems then with people swearing up and down that they didn't get the money and later getting a letter from the IRS adjusting their refund or turning the refund into a "you owe". Somehow that was our fault.

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
Kendrick, do you know where 'refundable credits' go on the tax return? Where does 'total tax' appear?

MEMPHISTAXLADY (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
I'm confused--Kiplinger letter states that there will be a special 2008 tax credit, and that the rebate is an advance payment of that tax credit...Kiplinger Tax Letter, Vol 83, No 4, dated Feb 22, 2008. It states "Technically, the rebate is an advance payment of a special 2008 tax credit. For most, the rebate will equal the tax credit allowed. Taxpayers whose credit exceeds their rebate will claim the balance on their 2008 tax return. If your rebate is bigger than the credit, you needn't repay the Service". HELP!! The Kiplinger Letter has always been a great source of info for me.

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
Isn't this exactly what I wrote?

Jefflief (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
Reply to orifginal question, "Dumb question - these tax rebates coming are NOT going to be taxable, right?"

Yes, that IS a dumb question. No Federal tax refunds, payments or witholding is EVER subject to taxation or deduction [as is the case with state refunds, payments and withholding].

Dusty (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
Ok, I read what Bottom Line wrote and it is not what I understand. Please, someone help me out here.

If, based on their income, an individual is scheduled to get a $1,200 refund this year. Next year their income and deductions are the same they will get a refund of $2,400 - $1,200 for the advanced refund they were to receive for a net of $1,200.

Is this not correct?

Dusty

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
no, Dusty, they don't get it twice

Wwtaxes (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
Suppose they had sent out the phone rebates in advance. If Joe's refund without the rebate was $500, and he got his rebate in advance, his total refund would still be $500. If he didn't get it in advance and you instead included it on his tax return (like the child advance credit worked), his refund would have been $530. It SEEMS like that is what the excerpt from the IRS is saying. Yet, other entries are making it sound like it is part of Joe's original $500 amount, in which case, his refund would be $470 if got the advance and $500 if he didn't. Which one is it?

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
you can have it now (if you file 2007 in 2008) or you can have it later (you don't file 2007 early enough for them to process by Dec), or you can have some now and some later (if your tax situation changes in 2008 and you are due more).

come on, folks, why is this so difficult to understand?

Blrgcpa (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
Check out irs.gov It has all the details of the rebate. It's a refund of 2007 tax liab. and not taxable.

Wwtaxes (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
Ok, I'll bite, since it seems to me that several others are questioning the whole thing as well. It would be very easy for me to understand if you had just told me which of the above scenarios is the right one. Apparently you know, but are keeping us guessing :-). I'm looking at your post and trying to figure out which sentence applies to which scenario. I think you are saying that first scenario is correct. Then you bring up the point that there is a third scenario where Joe got married or had a child and is actually entitled to a bigger amount.

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
I'm changing my answer to the same as BLRG's. It's easier. although not correct

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
I take that back, I won't change to an incorrect answer. I stick with my original ones.

Taocpa (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
WHAT? Since when is it a refund of 2007 tax liability?

Next thing someone will tell us it's an advance on the tax law changes coming in 2011. Geez.

Tom

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
(that's why I changed back - I didn't want to be any part of a lie or misunderstanding)

Lancermc (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
Has anyone received the famous IRS letter? If so what did it say? I looked at the IRS website, and you know I had trouble understanding the stimulus information they have posted there. File a Form 1040A if you are not otherwise required to file? This is going to be a real circus sideshow. Americans waiting patiently from May - December for "the stiumulus check". God help us!

Kevinh5- I understand your explanation, you are right, it is not that difficult.

Lalva (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
Kendrick, here is the information in the IRS website:

http://www.irs.gov/irs/article/0,,id=177937,00.html

Bottom Line (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
I'm warning people about the letter that's supposed to be going out in the next couple of weeks. I can hear the phone calls now "I GOT A LETTER FROM THE IRS!!!!!" aka - you're my tax preparer-what did you do wrong.

Sw (talk|edits) said:

2008-03-05
Enclosed is a link to the notice the IRS is suppost to be sending out soon.

www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/economic_stimulus_payment_notice.pdf

Wkstaxprep (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
rebate check = not taxable

if you don't get one this year, you get it as a refundable credit on next year's return.

end of story, no?

Will

Dusty (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
Ok, if the following Question on the IRS web site is correct:

Q. Will the payment I receive in 2008 reduce my 2008 refund or increase the amount I owe for 2008? A. No, the stimulus payment will not reduce your refund or increase the amount you owe when you file your 2008 return.

Then the following is correct:

If, based on their income, an individual is scheduled to get a $1,200 refund this year. Next year their income and deductions are the same they will get a refund of $2,400 - $1,200 for the advanced refund they received for a net of $1,200.

What is incorrect about what I just posted?

Dusty

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
Dusty, change the example to use different numbers - when you use 1200 and 1200 no one knows what you are doing. Also put in the Advance Stimulus Rebate amount, and the Stimulus amount they would be entitled to as a credit in 2008. Then we can discuss.

Dusty (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
Kevin:

Thanks, Here would be an updated example.

2007 refund $1,875

2007 Advance Stimulus Rebate amount $1,200 (MFJ with total tax of $5,000 - not self employed - no children)

2008 Income, deductions the same as 2007. Their refund would be:

Overpayment of $1,875

Eligible for $1,200 of Stimulus Rebate

Total of $3,075.

Received the Advance Stimulus Rebate of $1,200

Actual refund for 2008 $1,875.

Does that make more sense?

Thanks,

Dusty

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
yes, you've got it

Dusty (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
Kevin:

Thanks, I thought I understood it until I read some of the posts in this thread.

Dusty

Wkstaxprep (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2008
hey everyone,

i think we're way overanalyzing this rebate check.

it's just like the $300 rebate from a few years ago. if you didn't get it for some reason then the taxpayer received it as a refundable credit on the next year's tax return. it's really that simple.

the confusion arose when someone who already got the $300 also claimed the $300 on the next year's tax return, and vice versa someone who didn't get the check then subsequently forgot to take the credit on the next year's return.

Will

Kendrick (talk|edits) said:

6 March 2008
Dusty - your last post clarifies it for me. Exactly how I hope it is!

Good work . . .

Rwineland (talk|edits) said:

6 March 2008
Got this chart in a fwd: email from a client, showing when we can expect our rebate checks. anyone know of this?

The check is in the mail. If the Last 2 digits of your SSN are 00 - 09 Receive your check by week of July 23 10 - 19 July 30 20 - 29 August 6 30 - 39 August 13 40 - 49 August 20 50 - 59 August 27 60 - 69 Sept. 3 70 - 79 Sept. 10 80 - 89 Sept. 17 90 - 99 Sept. 24 For married taxpayers who filed a joint return, the first Social Security Number on the return determines the mailing date.Source: Internal Revenue Service

DeacDiggler (talk|edits) said:

6 March 2008
Section 6428(a) says that it's a new credit, which should clear up any idea that it's an advance of next years refund that would have been received without this legislation. If you get it now, your refund for 2008 will be calculated as if this law didn't exist at all. If you don't, you'll get an EXTRA refund next year.

To join in on this discussion, you must first log in.
Personal tools

Discussion Forums