Cost of Economic Stimulus

[retire@40]

It's bad enough that the government is going to waste paper, postage, and manpower mailing the checks this summer.

Now they are also going to waste even more paper, postage, and manpower mailing letters to remind people to file a tax return (whether they need to or not) in order to qualify for an "economic stimulus" check this summer.

Could they make it any more costly to give us back our money?

I wonder what this entire fiasco is costing to implement and execute?

[Notmuchlonger]

Democrats in congress are already talking about another stimulus bill. Can we at least see if round 1 works ?

[REWahoo]

Originally Posted by Notmuchlonger

Democrats in congress are already talking about another stimulus bill. Can we at least see if round 1 works ?

Doing what politicians do best - buying votes.

[retire@40]

Well, here it is. Read it and weep. And this is just the cost of the letters advising of the rebate. It doesn't even count the cost of the rebate checks and mailing.

Rebate letters to cost $42 million

By DEVLIN BARRETT, Associated Press Writer Fri Mar 7, 1:47 PM ET

WASHINGTON - At a cost of nearly $42 million, the IRS wants you to know: Your check is almost in the mail.
ADVERTISEMENT


The Internal Revenue Service is spending the money on letters to alert taxpayers to expect rebate checks as part of the economic stimulus plan.
The notices are going out this month to an estimated 130 million households who filed returns for the 2006 tax year, at a cost $41.8 million, IRS spokesman John Lipold confirmed.
That works out to about 32 cents to print, process and mail each letter. It doesn't include the tab for another round of mailings planned for those who didn't file tax returns last year but may still qualify for a rebate.

Rebate letters to cost $42 million - Yahoo! News

[growing_older]

Does getting or not getting a letter in any way affect my eligibility for the stimulus check? I think not. Of the vast majority of people who filed tax returns in 2006, how many would have been surprised to learn that they should also file returns in 2007? Not many I think. Sounds like a big waste of effort and money to me. Maybe they are wanting to stimulate the post office, too.

[chinaco]

I believe it will inject money into the economy. But it is not going to directly fix anyone's problem immediately or for even the short-term.

It probably is the right thing to do to try to kick start the economy or give it a jolt.

But we have more chronic problems also.

[Walt34]

I think it's just borrowing to put money in the left pocket to transfer it to the right pocket... or something like that.

The logic escapes me.

[retire@40]

I don't understand why they just could not have utilized line 55c on the 2007 Form 1040 to report this credit.

1. It would have been cheaper to administer by tens of millions of dollars.

2. It would have been easier to calculate. Computer would do the calculation, or a simple worksheet if doing by hand, or the IRS could have had an online worksheet on their website.

3. It would have meant the "rebates" got out much sooner during the tax return cycle instead of after the tax return cycle.

Make you wonder if anyone is really thinking out there.